↓ Skip to main content

Zebrafish models of cardiovascular disease

Overview of attention for article published in Heart Failure Reviews, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
94 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
237 Mendeley
Title
Zebrafish models of cardiovascular disease
Published in
Heart Failure Reviews, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10741-016-9579-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Despina Bournele, Dimitris Beis

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. The most significant risk factors associated with the development of heart diseases include genetic and environmental factors such as hypertension, high blood cholesterol levels, diabetes, smoking, and obesity. Coronary artery disease accounts for the highest percentage of CVD deaths and stroke, cardiomyopathies, congenital heart diseases, heart valve defects and arrhythmias follow. The causes, prevention, and treatment of all forms of cardiovascular disease remain active fields of biomedical research, with hundreds of scientific studies published on a weekly basis. Generating animal models of cardiovascular diseases is the main approach used to understand the mechanism of pathogenesis and also design and test novel therapies. Here, we will focus on recent advances to finding the genetic cause and the molecular mechanisms of CVDs as well as novel drugs to treat them, using a small tropical freshwater fish native to Southeast Asia: the zebrafish (Danio rerio). Zebrafish emerged as a high-throughput but low-cost model organism that combines the advantages of forward and reverse genetics with phenotype-driven drug screenings. Noninvasive imaging allows in vivo analyses of cardiovascular phenotypes. Functional verification of candidate genes from genome-wide association studies has verified the role of several genes in the pathophysiology of CVDs. Also, zebrafish hearts maintain their ability to regenerate throughout their lifetime, providing novel insights to understand human cardiac regeneration.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 237 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 19%
Student > Bachelor 42 18%
Student > Master 38 16%
Researcher 17 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 3%
Other 29 12%
Unknown 60 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 67 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 17 7%
Engineering 5 2%
Other 28 12%
Unknown 70 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 31 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,476,553
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Heart Failure Reviews
#365
of 667 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,929
of 364,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Heart Failure Reviews
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 667 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 364,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.