Cited by 144Genetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchGenomics and Rare Diseases

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rett syndrome diagnostic criteria: Lessons from the Natural History Study

Open access

Abstract

Analysis of 819 participants enrolled in the Rett syndrome (RTT) Natural History Study validates recently revised diagnostic criteria. 765 females fulfilled 2002 consensus criteria for classic (653/85.4%) or variant (112/14.6%) RTT. All participants classified as classic RTT fulfilled each revised main criterion; supportive criteria were not uniformly present. All variant RTT participants met at least 3 of 6 main criteria in the 2002, 2 of 4 main criteria in the current format, and 5 of 11 supportive criteria in both. This analysis underscores the critical role of main criteria for classic RTT; variant RTT requires both main and supportive criteria. Ann Neurol 2010

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ana.22154

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 16 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Rett A, 1966, Uber ein eigenartiges hirnatrophisches Syndrom bei Hyperammonamie im Kindesalter, Wien Medizin Wochschr, 116, 723
  2. 2010, Neul J. Ann Neurol, 68, 000

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 144

Metadata

Authors
Percy, A. K., Neul, J. L., Glaze, D. G., Motil, K. J., Skinner, S. A., Khwaja, O., Lee, H., Lane, J. B., Barrish, J. O., Annese, F., McNair, L., Graham, J., & Barnes, K.
Affiliations
  • Civitan International (US)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of South Florida (US)
Corresponding author
Percy, Alan K.
Venue
Annals of Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-11-22
Volume
68
Issue
6
Pages
951-955
ISSN
  • 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-8249
OpenAlex
W2105926864
Cited by
144
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
FWCI
3.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Agriculture
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Center for Research Resources (U54RR019478, M01RR000032)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD-38985, P30HD038985, U54HD061222)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
Keywords
Rett syndrome, diagnostic criteria, natural history (disease)
MeSH terms
Female, Humans, Male, Mutation, Rett Syndrome, Natural History, History, 20th Century, Methyl-CpG-Binding Protein 2

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review