The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Relevance of Aβ42/40 Ratio for Detection of Alzheimer Disease Pathology in Clinical Routine: The PLMR Scale
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2018.00138 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sylvain Lehmann, Constance Delaby, Guilaine Boursier, Cindy Catteau, Nelly Ginestet, Laurent Tiers, Aleksandra Maceski, Sophie Navucet, Claire Paquet, Julien Dumurgier, Eugeen Vanmechelen, Hugo Vanderstichele, Audrey Gabelle |
| Abstract |
Background: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (Aβ peptides and tau proteins) improved the diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in research and clinical settings. We previously described the PLM-scale (Paris-Lille-Montpellier study), which combines Aβ42, tau, and phosphorylated ptau(181) biomarkers in an easy to use and clinically relevant way. The purpose of this work is to evaluate an optimized PLMR-scale (PLM ratio scale) that now includes the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio to detect AD versus non-AD (NAD) participants in clinical routine of memory centers. Methods: Both scales were compared using 904 participants with cognitive impairment recruited from two independent cohorts (Mtp-1 and Mtp-2). The CSF Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio was measured systematically in Mtp-1, and only on biologically discordant cases in Mtp-2. Two different ELISA kit providers were also employed. The distribution of AD and NAD patients and the discrepancies of biomarker profiles were computed. Receiver Operating Characteristic curves were used to represent clinical sensitivity and specificity for AD detection. The classification of patients with the net reclassification index (NRI) was also evaluated. Results: Nine hundred and four participants (342 AD and 562 NAD) were studied; 400 in Mtp-1 and 504 in Mtp-2. For AD patients, the mean CSF Aβ42 and CSF Aβ42/40 ratio was 553 ± 216 pg/mL and 0.069 ± 0.022 pg/mL in Mtp-1 and 702 ± 335 pg/mL and 0.045 ± 0.020 pg/mL in Mtp-2. The distribution of AD and NAD differed between the PLM and the PLMR scales (p < 0.0001). The percentage AD well-classified (class 3) increased with PLMR from 38 to 83% in Mpt-1 and from 33 to 53% in Mpt-2. A sharp reduction of the discordant profiles going from 34 to 16.3% and from 37.5 to 19.8%, for Mtp-1 and Mtp-2 respectively, was also observed. The AUC of the PLMR scale was 0.94 in Mtp-1 and 0.87 in Mtp-2. In both cohorts, the PLMR outperformed CSF Aβ42 or Aβ42/40 ratio. The diagnostic performance was improved with the PLMR with an NRI equal to 44.3% in Mtp-1 and 28.8% in Mtp-2. Conclusion: The integration of the Aβ42/Aβ40 ratio in the PLMR scale resulted in an easy-to-use tool which reduced the discrepancies in biologically doubtful cases and increased the confidence in the diagnosis in memory center. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 82 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 17% |
| Researcher | 9 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 28 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 6% |
| Engineering | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 30 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 12 January 2023.
All research outputs
#2,351,507
of 25,152,132 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#746
of 5,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,364
of 337,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#25
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,152,132 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,434 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 337,587 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.