A. W. G. Buijink, M. F. Contarino, J. H. T. M. Koelman, J. D. Speelman, A. F. van Rootselaar
Abstract
Background: Tremor is the most prevalent movement disorder in clinical practice. It is defined as involuntary, rhythmic, oscillatory movements. The diagnostic process of patients with tremor can be laborious and challenging, and a clear, systematic overview of available diagnostic techniques is lacking. Tremor can be a symptom of many diseases, but can also represent a distinct disease entity. Objective: The objective of this review is to give a clear, systematic and step-wise overview of the diagnostic work-up of a patient with tremor. The clinical relevance and value of available laboratory tests in patients with tremor will be explored. Methods: We systematically searched through EMBASE. The retrieved articles were supplemented by articles containing relevant data or provided important background information. Studies that were included investigated the value and/or usability of diagnostic tests for tremor. Results: In most patients, history and clinical examination by an experienced movement disorders neurologist are sufficient to establish a correct diagnosis, and further ancillary examinations will not be needed. Ancillary investigation should always be guided by tremor type(s) present and other associated signs and symptoms. The main ancillary examination techniques currently are electromyography and SPECT imaging. Unfortunately, many techniques have not been studied in large prospective, diagnostic studies to be able to determine important variables like sensitivity and specificity. Conclusion: When encountering a patient with tremor, history, and careful clinical examination should guide the diagnostic process. Adherence to the diagnostic work-up provided in this review will help the diagnostic process of these patients.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#6,113,412
of 22,684,168 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#4,068
of 11,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,997
of 244,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#30
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,684,168 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,581 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 244,115 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
