↓ Skip to main content

Serum DKK-1 level in the development of ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatic arthritis: a meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental and Molecular Medicine, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Serum DKK-1 level in the development of ankylosing spondylitis and rheumatic arthritis: a meta-analysis
Published in
Experimental and Molecular Medicine, April 2016
DOI 10.1038/emm.2016.12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Li Zhang, Hui Ouyang, Zhen Xie, Zhi-Hui Liang, Xiong-Wen Wu

Abstract

To explore the association of serum Dickkopf-1 (DKK-1) levels with the development of ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and rheumatic arthritis (RA) in humans, databases including PubMed, EBSCO, Springerlink, Ovid, WANFANG and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) were searched to identify relevant studies. On the basis of rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria, case-control studies of the relationships between serum DKK-1 levels and AS and RA published before December 2014 were enrolled. Statistical analyses were performed using Comprehensive Meta-analysis 2.0 (CMA 2.0). Seven case-control trials with a total of 300 AS patients, 136 RA patients and 232 healthy controls were included in this study. Meta-analysis results revealed that DKK-1 serum levels were significantly higher in AS patients than in normal controls (standard mean differences (s.m.d.)=0.301, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.094-0.507, P=0.004), whereas no significant difference in DKK-1 serum levels was observed between RA patients and healthy controls (s.m.d.=0.798, 95% CI=-2.166-3.763, P=0.598). Serum DKK-1 level may be closely related to the development of AS but not of RA.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 21%
Student > Master 4 14%
Researcher 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 5 18%
Unknown 6 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 04 November 2016.
All research outputs
#8,199,598
of 14,259,038 outputs
Outputs from Experimental and Molecular Medicine
#434
of 810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,778
of 262,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental and Molecular Medicine
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,259,038 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 810 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 262,608 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.