↓ Skip to main content

Hereditary causes of kidney stones and chronic kidney disease

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Nephrology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
212 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
237 Mendeley
Title
Hereditary causes of kidney stones and chronic kidney disease
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology, January 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00467-012-2329-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vidar O. Edvardsson, David S. Goldfarb, John C. Lieske, Lada Beara-Lasic, Franca Anglani, Dawn S. Milliner, Runolfur Palsson

Abstract

Adenine phosphoribosyltransferase (APRT) deficiency, cystinuria, Dent disease, familial hypomagnesemia with hypercalciuria and nephrocalcinosis (FHHNC), and primary hyperoxaluria (PH) are rare but important causes of severe kidney stone disease and/or chronic kidney disease in children. Recurrent kidney stone disease and nephrocalcinosis, particularly in pre-pubertal children, should alert the physician to the possibility of an inborn error of metabolism as the underlying cause. Unfortunately, the lack of recognition and knowledge of the five disorders has frequently resulted in an unacceptable delay in diagnosis and treatment, sometimes with grave consequences. A high index of suspicion coupled with early diagnosis may reduce or even prevent the serious long-term complications of these diseases. In this paper, we review the epidemiology, clinical features, diagnosis, treatment, and outcome of patients with APRT deficiency, cystinuria, Dent disease, FHHNC, and PH, with an emphasis on childhood manifestations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Sri Lanka 1 <1%
Unknown 234 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 35 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 11%
Other 23 10%
Student > Master 19 8%
Researcher 18 8%
Other 52 22%
Unknown 65 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 96 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 4%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 20 8%
Unknown 67 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 January 2022.
All research outputs
#4,675,283
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Nephrology
#745
of 4,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,546
of 299,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Nephrology
#4
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,276 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 299,602 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.