↓ Skip to main content

Muscarinic receptor binding changes in postmortem Parkinson’s disease

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neural Transmission, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Muscarinic receptor binding changes in postmortem Parkinson’s disease
Published in
Journal of Neural Transmission, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00702-016-1629-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Caitlin McOmish, Geoff Pavey, Catriona McLean, Malcolm Horne, Brian Dean, Elizabeth Scarr

Abstract

Parkinson's disease (PD) is a devastating disorder, affecting approximately 2% of people aged 60 and above. It is marked by progressive neurodegeneration that has long been known to impact dopaminergic cells and circuits, but more recently the acetylcholine system has also been implicated in the complex aetiology and symptomatology of the disease. While broad changes in cholinergic markers have been described, insight into the contribution of specific acetylcholine receptors is less clear. To address this important unknown, in this study we performed [(3)H] pirenzepine, [(3)H] 4DAMP, and [(3)H] AF-DX 384 in situ radioligand binding on postmortem tissues from Brodmann's area 6, 9, 46, and the caudate putamen, from PD and matched controls to detect muscarinic M1, M3, and M1/2/4 receptors, respectively. We found no difference in [(3)H] pirenzepine binding between PD and controls across all regions assessed. [(3)H] 4DAMP binding was found to be higher in PD CPu and BA9 than in controls. [(3)H] AF-DX 384 was higher in BA9 of PD compared with controls. In sum, we show selective increase in M3 receptors in cortical and subcortical regions, as well as increased M2/M4 in cortical area BA9, which together support a role for cholinergic dysfunction in PD.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 23%
Other 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Professor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 6 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 7 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 6 23%
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 25 November 2016.
All research outputs
#4,195,563
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neural Transmission
#331
of 1,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,587
of 414,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neural Transmission
#9
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 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 1,769 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 414,929 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 63% of its contemporaries.