↓ Skip to main content

Mineral and Bone Disorders After Kidney Transplantation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
Mineral and Bone Disorders After Kidney Transplantation
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2018.00211
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chandan Vangala, Jenny Pan, Ronald T. Cotton, Venkat Ramanathan

Abstract

The risk of mineral and bone disorders among patients with chronic kidney disease is substantially elevated, owing largely to alterations in calcium, phosphorus, vitamin D, parathyroid hormone, and fibroblast growth factor 23. The interwoven relationship among these minerals and hormones results in maladaptive responses that are differentially affected by the process of kidney transplantation. Interpretation of conventional labs, imaging, and other fracture risk assessment tools are not standardized in the post-transplant setting. Post-transplant bone disease is not uniformly improved and considerable variation exists in monitoring and treatment practices. A spectrum of abnormalities such as hypophosphatemia, hypercalcemia, hyperparathyroidism, osteomalacia, osteopenia, and osteoporosis are commonly encountered in the post-transplant period. Thus, reducing fracture risk and other bone-related complications requires recognition of these abnormalities along with the risk incurred by concomitant immunosuppression use. As kidney transplant recipients continue to age, the drivers of bone disease vary throughout the post-transplant period among persistent hyperparathyroidism, de novo hyperparathyroidism, and osteoporosis. The use of anti-resorptive therapies require understanding of different options and the clinical scenarios that warrant their use. With limited studies underscoring clinical events such as fractures, expert understanding of MBD physiology, and surrogate marker interpretation is needed to determine ideal and individualized therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 87 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 87 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 30 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 38 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,422,246
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#2,510
of 5,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,666
of 329,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#38
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,855 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 329,833 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.