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 NaV1.7 Channel Subtype as an Antinociceptive Target for Spider Toxins in Adult Dorsal Root Ganglia Neurons
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2018.01000 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tânia C. Gonçalves, Evelyne Benoit, Michel Partiseti, Denis Servent |
| Abstract |
Although necessary for human survival, pain may sometimes become pathologic if long-lasting and associated with alterations in its signaling pathway. Opioid painkillers are officially used to treat moderate to severe, and even mild, pain. However, the consequent strong and not so rare complications that occur, including addiction and overdose, combined with pain management costs, remain an important societal and economic concern. In this context, animal venom toxins represent an original source of antinociceptive peptides that mainly target ion channels (such as ASICs as well as TRP, CaV, KV and NaV channels) involved in pain transmission. The present review aims to highlight the NaV1.7 channel subtype as an antinociceptive target for spider toxins in adult dorsal root ganglia neurons. It will detail (i) the characteristics of these primary sensory neurons, the first ones in contact with pain stimulus and conveying the nociceptive message, (ii) the electrophysiological properties of the different NaV channel subtypes expressed in these neurons, with a particular attention on the NaV1.7 subtype, an antinociceptive target of choice that has been validated by human genetic evidence, and (iii) the features of spider venom toxins, shaped of inhibitory cysteine knot motif, that present high affinity for the NaV1.7 subtype associated with evidenced analgesic efficacy in animal models. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 17 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 12 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 22 | 31% |
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 26 September 2018.
All research outputs
#17,990,409
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#7,270
of 16,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,580
of 335,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#194
of 396 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 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 16,460 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 335,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 396 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.