↓ Skip to main content

Do Copy Number Changes in CACNA2D2, CACNA2D3, and CACNA1D Constitute a Predisposing Risk Factor for Alzheimer’s Disease?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, June 2016
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Do Copy Number Changes in CACNA2D2, CACNA2D3, and CACNA1D Constitute a Predisposing Risk Factor for Alzheimer’s Disease?
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2016.00107
Pubmed ID
Authors

Darine Villela, Claudia K. Suemoto, Carlos A. Pasqualucci, Lea T. Grinberg, Carla Rosenberg

Abstract

Dysregulation of calcium (Ca(2+)) homeostasis is now being recognized to be a key step in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Data from the literature, in particular the association between AD and polymorphism that interfere with Ca(2+) homeostasis indicates the presence of genetic factors in this process; further, presenilins mutations, which are known to cause the familial form of AD, are involved in the regulation of intracellular Ca(2+) stores. Here, we wish to draw attention to rare DNA copy number variations identified in two subjects with late-onset AD that led to partial or full duplication of genes that encode different subunits of the same type of voltage-gated Ca(2+) channels; these duplications of voltage-gated Ca(2+) channel genes is consistent with the critical role of calcium signaling in molecular processes underlying memory as has been demonstrated by several studies.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 19%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 11 October 2016.
All research outputs
#2,575,144
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#648
of 11,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,305
of 352,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#4
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,919 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 352,714 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.