The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Midbrain catecholaminergic neurons co-express α-synuclein and tau in progressive supranuclear palsy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnana.2015.00025 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
María Elena Erro Aguirre, María Victoria Zelaya, Javier Sánchez Ruiz de Gordoa, María Teresa Tuñón, José Luis Lanciego |
| Abstract |
Objective: To analyze the frequency and distribution of α-synuclein deposits in progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). Methods: The brains of 25 cases of pathologically confirmed PSP were evaluated with immunohistochemistry for α-synuclein and tau. Multiple immunofluorescent stains were applied to analyze the expression of tau and α-synuclein aggregates in catecholaminergic neurons. Patients' clinical symptoms were retrospectively recorded. Results: Deposits α-synuclein in the form of typical Lewy bodies (LBs) were only found in two PSP cases (8%) that fulfilled the clinical subtype of PSP known as Richardson's syndrome (RS). LBs were present in the locus ceruleus (LC), substantia nigra pars compacta (SNc), basal forebrain, amygdala and cingulated cortex in a distribution mimicking that of Parkinson's disease (PD). Triple-immunolabeling revealed co-expression of α-synuclein and tau proteins in some tyrosine hydroxilase (TH)-positive neurons of the LC and SNc. Conclusions: There is no apparent clinical correlation between the presence of LBs in PSP. Tau protein co-aggregate with α-synuclein in catecholaminergic neurons of PSP brains suggesting a synergistic interaction between the two proteins. This is in keeping with the current view of neurodegenerative disorders as "misfolded protein diseases". |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 21% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 7 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 17% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#4,172,844
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#309
of 1,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#51,996
of 259,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#5
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 259,187 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.