↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Identification of a novel pathogenic OTOF variant causative of nonsyndromic hearing loss with high frequency in the Ashkenazi Jewish population

Overview of attention for article published in The Application of Clinical Genetics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Identification of a novel pathogenic OTOF variant causative of nonsyndromic hearing loss with high frequency in the Ashkenazi Jewish population
Published in
The Application of Clinical Genetics, August 2016
DOI 10.2147/tacg.s113828
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anastasia M Fedick, Chaim Jalas, Ananya Swaroop, Eric E Smouha, Bryn D Webb

Abstract

Mutations in the OTOF gene have previously been shown to cause nonsyndromic prelingual deafness (DFNB9, OMIM 601071) as well as auditory neuropathy/dys-synchrony. In this study, the OTOF NM_194248.2 c.5332G>T, p.Val1778Phe variant was identified in a large Ashkenazi Jewish family as the causative variant in four siblings with hearing loss. Our analysis reveals a carrier frequency of the OTOF c.5332G>T, p.Val1778Phe variant of 1.27% in the Ashkenazi Jewish population, suggesting that this variant may be a significant contributor to nonsyndromic sensorineural hearing loss and should be considered for inclusion in targeted hearing loss panels for this population. Of note, the degree of hearing loss associated with this phenotype ranged from mild to moderately severe, with two of the four siblings not known to have hearing loss until they were genotyped and underwent pure tone audiometry and auditory brainstem response testing. The phenotypic variability along with the auditory neuropathy/dys-synchrony, which allows for the production of otoacoustic emissions, supports that nonsyndromic hearing loss caused by OTOF mutations may be much more common in the Ashkenazi Jewish population than currently appreciated due to a lack of diagnosis.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 25%
Unspecified 4 20%
Other 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 3 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 35%
Unspecified 4 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 20%
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 14 September 2016.
All research outputs
#23,100,963
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from The Application of Clinical Genetics
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#340,825
of 382,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Application of Clinical Genetics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.2. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 382,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them