The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 |
The Genetics of Reading Disabilities: From Phenotypes to Candidate Genes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00601 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wendy H. Raskind, Beate Peter, Todd Richards, Mark M. Eckert, Virginia W. Berninger |
| Abstract |
This article provides an overview of (a) issues in definition and diagnosis of specific reading disabilities at the behavioral level that may occur in different constellations of developmental and phenotypic profiles (patterns); (b) rapidly expanding research on genetic heterogeneity and gene candidates for dyslexia and other reading disabilities; (c) emerging research on gene-brain relationships; and (d) current understanding of epigenetic mechanisms whereby environmental events may alter behavioral expression of genetic variations. A glossary of genetic terms (denoted by bold font) is provided for readers not familiar with the technical terms. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 13% |
| Ireland | 1 | 13% |
| Italy | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 63% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 139 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 14% |
| Researcher | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 27 | 19% |
| Unknown | 30 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 35 | 24% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 33 | 23% |
| Unknown | 28 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 19 January 2024.
All research outputs
#2,449,523
of 26,525,642 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,943
of 35,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,392
of 294,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#211
of 966 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,525,642 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 35,482 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.8. 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 294,711 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 966 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.