Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 936

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevalence of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA mutations related to adult mitochondrial disease

Open access
Gorman, Gráinne S., Schaefer, Andrew M., Ng, Yi, Gomez, Nicholas, Blakely, Emma L., Alston, Charlotte L., Feeney, Catherine, Horvath, Rita, Yu‐Wai‐Man, Patrick, Chinnery, Patrick F., Taylor, Robert W., Turnbull, Douglass M., McFarland, Robert·2015·Annals of Neurology

Abstract

Objective: The prevalence of mitochondrial disease has proven difficult to establish, predominantly as a result of clinical and genetic heterogeneity. The phenotypic spectrum of mitochondrial disease has expanded significantly since the original reports that associated classic clinical syndromes with mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) rearrangements and point mutations. The revolution in genetic technologies has allowed interrogation of the nuclear genome in a manner that has dramatically improved the diagnosis of mitochondrial disorders. We comprehensively assessed the prevalence of all forms of adult mitochondrial disease to include pathogenic mutations in both nuclear and mtDNA. Methods: Adults with suspected mitochondrial disease in the North East of England were referred to a single neurology center from 1990 to 2014. For the midyear period of 2011, we evaluated the minimum prevalence of symptomatic nuclear DNA mutations and symptomatic and asymptomatic mtDNA mutations causing mitochondrial diseases. Results: The minimum prevalence rate for mtDNA mutations was 1 in 5,000 (20 per 100,000), comparable with our previously published prevalence rates. In this population, nuclear mutations were responsible for clinically overt adult mitochondrial disease in 2.9 per 100,000 adults. Interpretation: Combined, our data confirm that the total prevalence of adult mitochondrial disease, including pathogenic mutations of both the mitochondrial and nuclear genomes (≈1 in 4,300), is among the commonest adult forms of inherited neurological disorders. These figures hold important implications for the evaluation of interventions, provision of evidence‐based health policies, and planning of future services. Ann Neurol 2015 Ann Neurol 2015;77:753–759

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.24362

Cites

20 of 20 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

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

Show all 20 references

Cited by

See all 936

Metadata

Authors
Gorman, G. S., Schaefer, A. M., Ng, Y., Gomez, N., Blakely, E. L., Alston, C. L., Feeney, C., Horvath, R., Yu‐Wai‐Man, P., Chinnery, P. F., Taylor, R. W., Turnbull, D. M., & McFarland, R.
Venue
Annals of Neurology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03-28
Volume
77
Issue
5
Pages
753-759
ISSN
  • 0364-5134 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-8249
OpenAlex
W1521947818
Cited by
936
References
20
FWCI
26.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prevalence of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA mutations related to adult mitochondrial disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ana.24362
The paper
Gorman, G. S., Schaefer, A. M., Ng, Y., Gomez, N., Blakely, E. L., Alston, C. L., Feeney, C., Horvath, R., Yu‐Wai‐Man, P., Chinnery, P. F., Taylor, R. W., Turnbull, D. M., & McFarland, R. (2015). Prevalence of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA mutations related to adult mitochondrial disease. Annals of Neurology. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24362

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.