↓ Skip to main content

Recommendations of the Scientific Committee of the Italian Beckwith–Wiedemann Syndrome Association on the diagnosis, management and follow-up of the syndrome

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Medical Genetics, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
79 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
Title
Recommendations of the Scientific Committee of the Italian Beckwith–Wiedemann Syndrome Association on the diagnosis, management and follow-up of the syndrome
Published in
European Journal of Medical Genetics, November 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.ejmg.2015.11.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandro Mussa, Stefania Di Candia, Silvia Russo, Serena Catania, Maurizio De Pellegrin, Luisa Di Luzio, Mario Ferrari, Chiara Tortora, Maria Costanza Meazzini, Roberto Brusati, Donatella Milani, Giuseppe Zampino, Rosario Montirosso, Andrea Riccio, Angelo Selicorni, Guido Cocchi, Giovanni Battista Ferrero

Abstract

Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome (BWS) is the most common (epi)genetic overgrowth-cancer predisposition disorder. Given the absence of consensual recommendations or international guidelines, the Scientific Committee of the Italian BWS Association (www.aibws.org) proposed these recommendations for the diagnosis, molecular testing, clinical management, follow-up and tumor surveillance of patients with BWS. The recommendations are intended to allow a timely and appropriate diagnosis of the disorder, to assist patients and their families, to provide clinicians and caregivers optimal strategies for an adequate and satisfactory care, aiming also at standardizing clinical practice as a national uniform approach. They also highlight the direction of future research studies in this setting. With recent advances in understanding the disease (epi)genetic mechanisms and in describing large cohorts of BWS patients, the natural history of the disease will be dissected. In the era of personalized medicine, the emergence of specific (epi)genotype-phenotype correlations in BWS will likely lead to differentiated follow-up approaches for the molecular subgroups, to the development of novel tools to evaluate the likelihood of cancer development and to the refinement and optimization of current tumor screening strategies. In this article, we provide the first comprehensive recommendations on the complex management of patients with Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 104 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 16 15%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 28 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 9%
Psychology 5 5%
Computer Science 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 29 28%
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 27 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Medical Genetics
#733
of 1,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,659
of 393,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Medical Genetics
#12
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,078 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 393,305 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.