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.
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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The Underexploited Role of Non-Coding RNAs in Lysosomal Storage Diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in endocrinology, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fendo.2016.00133 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matheus Trovão de Queiroz, Vanessa Gonçalves Pereira, Cinthia Castro do Nascimento, Vânia D’Almeida |
| Abstract |
Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) are a functional class of RNA involved in the regulation of several cellular processes which may modulate disease onset, progression, and prognosis. Lysosomal storage diseases (LSD) are a group of rare disorders caused by mutations of genes encoding specific hydrolases or non-enzymatic proteins, characterized by a wide spectrum of manifestations. The alteration of ncRNA levels is well established in several human diseases such as cancer and auto-immune disorders; however, there is a lack of information focused on the role of ncRNA in rare diseases. Recent reports related to changes in ncRNA expression and its consequences on LSD physiopathology show us the importance to keep advancing in this field. This article will summarize recent findings and provide key points for further studies on LSD and ncRNA association. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 24 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 24% |
| Researcher | 5 | 20% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 20% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 32% |
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 21 September 2016.
All research outputs
#21,110,894
of 25,932,719 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in endocrinology
#6,928
of 13,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,274
of 330,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in endocrinology
#21
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,932,719 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 330,200 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.