↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of patients with multiple sclerosis using reverse nutech functional score and expanded disability status scale after human embryonic stem cell therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Medicine, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of patients with multiple sclerosis using reverse nutech functional score and expanded disability status scale after human embryonic stem cell therapy
Published in
Clinical and Translational Medicine, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40169-016-0124-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geeta Shroff

Abstract

The expanded disability status scale (EDSS) is a validated and reliable tool to assess the extent of disabilities in patients with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the use of this tool has been found to be limited in assessing various symptoms of MS that are important. Our study aimed at evaluating the efficacy of a new scoring system, reverse nutech functional score (RNFS) as compared to EDSS in assessing patients with MS treated with human embryonic stem cell (hESC) therapy. The MS patients were treated with hESC therapy for one treatment period. All the patients were evaluated with EDSS and RNFS at baseline and after the hESC therapy. The study included a total of 24 MS patients with mean age of 45 year. The patients showed an improvement in parameters (sleeping disorders, paralysis, paraesthesia, myalgia, muscle weakness, memory, language, irritability, eye pain, depression and coordination, communication, breathing pattern, attention and appetite) associated with MS when evaluated with RNFS. This improvement went unnoticed when the patients were assessed with EDSS. RNFS can efficiently assess the effectiveness of hESC therapy in treating patients with MS. It could be a suitable scoring system for patients with MS as it can assess the slightest improvements in the patients. Use in other settings would be helpful in assessing its utility.

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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 23%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Neuroscience 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 5 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#4,364,351
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#188
of 1,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,387
of 322,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Medicine
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 322,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.