↓ Skip to main content

Fibrillins in Tendon

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
38 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
Fibrillins in Tendon
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, October 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00237
Pubmed ID
Authors

Betti Giusti, Guglielmina Pepe

Abstract

Tendons among connective tissue, mainly collagen, contain also elastic fibers (EF) made of fibrillin 1, fibrillin 2 and elastin that are broadly distributed in tendons and represent 1-2% of the dried mass of the tendon. Only in the last years, studies on structure and function of EF in tendons have been performed. Aim of this review is to revise data on the organization of EF in tendons, in particular fibrillin structure and function, and on the clinical manifestations associated to alterations of EF in tendons. Indeed, microfibrils may contribute to tendon mechanics; therefore, their alterations may cause joint hypermobility and contractures which have been found to be clinical features in patients with Marfan syndrome (MFS) and Beals syndrome. The two diseases are caused by mutations in genes FBN1 and FBN2 encoding fibrillin 1 and fibrillin 2, respectively.

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 2 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Master 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 42%
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 05 November 2016.
All research outputs
#17,823,285
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#3,819
of 4,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,448
of 315,898 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#55
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,823 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 315,898 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.