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 |
Genetics Underlying an Individualized Approach to Adult Spinal Disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Surgery, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fsurg.2016.00061 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Corey T. Walker, Phillip A. Bonney, Nikolay L. Martirosyan, Nicholas Theodore |
| Abstract |
Adult spinal disorders are a significant cause of morbidity across the world and carry significant health and economic burdens. Genetic predispositions are increasingly considered for these conditions and are becoming understood. Advances in molecular technologies since the mid-1990s have made possible genetic characterizations of these diseases in many populations, and recent findings have provided insight into the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms. These studies have made clear the genetic heterogeneity producing clinical phenotypes and suggest that individualized treatments are possible in the future. We review the genetics and heritability of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament and perform a systematic review of the genetics of adult lumbar degenerative scoliotic deformity, highlighting recent discoveries and the potential for personalized future therapeutics for these patients. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 17% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 22% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 30% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
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 22 November 2016.
All research outputs
#18,483,671
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#925
of 2,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#303,040
of 415,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 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 2,911 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 415,136 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.