↓ Skip to main content

Autoimmune Myopathies: Where Do We Stand?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Autoimmune Myopathies: Where Do We Stand?
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00234
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Philippe Simon, Isabelle Marie, Fabienne Jouen, Olivier Boyer, Jérémie Martinet

Abstract

Autoimmune diseases (AIDs) as a whole represent a major health concern and remain a medical and scientific challenge. Some of them, such as multiple sclerosis or type 1 diabetes, have been actively investigated for many decades. Autoimmune myopathies (AIMs), also referred to as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies or myositis, represent a group of very severe AID for which we have a more limited pathophysiological knowledge. AIM encompass a group of, individually rare but collectively not so uncommon, diseases characterized by symmetrical proximal muscle weakness, increased serum muscle enzymes such as creatine kinase, myopathic changes on electromyography, and several typical histological patterns on muscle biopsy, including the presence of inflammatory cell infiltrates in muscle tissue. Importantly, some AIMs are strongly related to cancer. Here, we review the current knowledge on the most prevalent forms of AIM and, notably, the diagnostic contribution of autoantibodies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 2%
Unknown 59 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 15%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Other 18 30%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 11 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2019.
All research outputs
#4,588,484
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#4,892
of 31,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,646
of 368,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#17
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,565 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.