The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 |
Inherited Thrombophilia in Pediatric Venous Thromboembolic Disease: Why and Who to Test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pediatrics, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fped.2017.00050 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. Heleen van Ommen, Ulrike Nowak-Göttl |
| Abstract |
Venous thromboembolic disease in childhood is a multifactorial disease. Risk factors include acquired clinical risk factors such as a central venous catheter and underlying disease and inherited thrombophilia. Inherited thrombophilia is defined as a genetically determined tendency to develop venous thromboembolism. In contrast to adults, acquired clinical risk factors play a larger role than inherited thrombophilia in the development of thrombotic disease in children. The contributing role of inherited thrombophilia is not clear in many pediatric thrombotic events, especially catheter-related thrombosis. Furthermore, identification of inherited thrombophilia will not often influence acute management of the thrombotic event as well as the duration of anticoagulation. In some patients, however, detection of inherited thrombophilia may lead to identification of other family members who can be counseled for their thrombotic risk. This article discusses the potential arguments for testing of inherited thrombophilia, including factor V Leiden mutation, prothrombin mutation, and deficiencies of antithrombin, protein C, or protein S and suggests some patient groups in childhood, which may be tested. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 61 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 11% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 20 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 44% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 22 | 36% |
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 14 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,538,272
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#3,379
of 6,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,064
of 307,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#60
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,021 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 307,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.