↓ Skip to main content

Glutamate Neurocircuitry: Theoretical Underpinnings in Schizophrenia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
149 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
415 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Glutamate Neurocircuitry: Theoretical Underpinnings in Schizophrenia
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2012.00195
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas L. Schwartz, Shilpa Sachdeva, Stephen M. Stahl

Abstract

The Dopamine Hypothesis of Schizophrenia is actively being challenged by the NMDA Receptor Hypofunctioning Hypothesis of Schizophrenia. The latter hypothesis may actually be the starting point in neuronal pathways that ultimately modifies dopamine pathways involved in generating both positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia postulated by the former hypothesis. The authors suggest that even this latter, NMDA receptor-based, hypothesis is likely too narrow and offer a review of typical glutamate and dopamine-based neurocircuitry, propose genetic vulnerabilities impacting glutamate neurocircuitry, and provide a broad interpretation of a possible etiology of schizophrenia. In conclusion, there is a brief review of potential schizophrenia treatments that rely on the etiologic theory provided in the body of the paper.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 415 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Bolivia, Plurinational State of 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 407 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 85 20%
Student > Master 72 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 13%
Researcher 33 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 26 6%
Other 52 13%
Unknown 94 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 78 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 70 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 14%
Psychology 54 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 5%
Other 33 8%
Unknown 102 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 13 February 2013.
All research outputs
#7,320,323
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#3,147
of 15,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,163
of 244,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#43
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,880 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 244,125 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.