↓ Skip to main content

Macrophages in Alzheimer’s disease: the blood-borne identity

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neural Transmission, June 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 Mendeley
Title
Macrophages in Alzheimer’s disease: the blood-borne identity
Published in
Journal of Neural Transmission, June 2010
DOI 10.1007/s00702-010-0422-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Gate, Kavon Rezai-Zadeh, Dominique Jodry, Altan Rentsendorj, Terrence Town

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive and incurable neurodegenerative disorder clinically characterized by cognitive decline involving loss of memory, reasoning and linguistic ability. The amyloid cascade hypothesis holds that mismetabolism and aggregation of neurotoxic amyloid-beta (Abeta) peptides, which are deposited as amyloid plaques, are the central etiological events in AD. Recent evidence from AD mouse models suggests that blood-borne mononuclear phagocytes are capable of infiltrating the brain and restricting beta-amyloid plaques, thereby limiting disease progression. These observations raise at least three key questions: (1) what is the cell of origin for macrophages in the AD brain, (2) do blood-borne macrophages impact the pathophysiology of AD and (3) could these enigmatic cells be therapeutically targeted to curb cerebral amyloidosis and thereby slow disease progression? This review begins with a historical perspective of peripheral mononuclear phagocytes in AD, and moves on to critically consider the controversy surrounding their identity as distinct from brain-resident microglia and their potential impact on AD pathology.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 121 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 25%
Researcher 24 19%
Student > Bachelor 17 13%
Student > Master 14 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 19 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 36%
Neuroscience 16 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 23 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 29 December 2020.
All research outputs
#4,154,057
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neural Transmission
#329
of 1,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,422
of 95,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neural Transmission
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 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 1,760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 95,988 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.