↓ Skip to main content

TRPs in Pain Sensation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
video
1 YouTube creator

Readers on

mendeley
204 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
TRPs in Pain Sensation
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00392
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isaac Jardín, José J. López, Raquel Diez, José Sánchez-Collado, Carlos Cantonero, Letizia Albarrán, Geoffrey E. Woodard, Pedro C. Redondo, Ginés M. Salido, Tarik Smani, Juan A. Rosado

Abstract

According to the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) pain is characterized as an "unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage". The TRP super-family, compressing up to 28 isoforms in mammals, mediates a myriad of physiological and pathophysiological processes, pain among them. TRP channel might be constituted by similar or different TRP subunits, which will result in the formation of homomeric or heteromeric channels with distinct properties and functions. In this review we will discuss about the function of TRPs in pain, focusing on TRP channles that participate in the transduction of noxious sensation, especially TRPV1 and TRPA1, their expression in nociceptors and their sensitivity to a large number of physical and chemical stimuli.

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 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 204 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 13%
Student > Master 25 12%
Researcher 23 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 5%
Other 29 14%
Unknown 61 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 23 11%
Neuroscience 23 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 8%
Other 22 11%
Unknown 66 32%
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 18 June 2020.
All research outputs
#18,554,389
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,197
of 13,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,796
of 317,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#173
of 275 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 317,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 275 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.