↓ Skip to main content

Pathology of Podocytopathies Causing Nephrotic Syndrome in Children

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
Pathology of Podocytopathies Causing Nephrotic Syndrome in Children
Published in
Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fped.2016.00032
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarangarajan Ranganathan

Abstract

Nephrotic syndrome (NS) in children includes a diverse group of diseases that range from genetic diseases without any immunological defects to causes that are primarily due to immunological effects. Recent advances in molecular and genomic studies have resulted in a plethora of genetic defects that have been localized to the podocyte, the basic structure that is instrumental in normal filtration process. Although the disease can manifest from birth and into adulthood, the primary focus of this review would be to describe the novel genes and pathology of primary podocyte defects that cause NS in children. This review will restrict itself to the pathology of congenital NS, minimal change disease (MCD), and its variants and focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). The two major types of congenital NS are Finnish type characterized by dilated sausage shaped tubules morphologically and diffuse mesangial sclerosis characterized by glomerulosclerosis. MCD has usually normal appearing biopsy features on light microscopy and needs electron microscopy for diagnosis, whereas FSGS in contrast has classic segmental sclerosing lesions identified in different portions of the glomeruli and tubular atrophy. This review summarizes the pathological characteristics of these conditions and also delves into the various genetic defects that have been described as the cause of these primary podocytopathies. Other secondary causes of NS in children, such as membranoproliferative and membranous glomerulonephritis, will not be covered in this review.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 86 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Master 9 10%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 28 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Unspecified 2 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 29 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,683,389
of 23,305,591 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#2,751
of 6,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,094
of 302,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#32
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,305,591 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 302,153 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.