| Title |
Analysis of Gut Microbiota in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10517-017-3700-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
V. A. Petrov, I. V. Saltykova, I. A. Zhukova, V. M. Alifirova, N. G. Zhukova, Yu. B. Dorofeeva, A. V. Tyakht, B. A. Kovarsky, D. G. Alekseev, E. S. Kostryukova, Yu. S. Mironova, O. P. Izhboldina, M. A. Nikitina, T. V. Perevozchikova, E. A. Fait, V. V. Babenko, M. T. Vakhitova, V. M. Govorun, A. E. Sazonov |
| Abstract |
Gut microbiota of patients with Parkinson's disease and healthy volunteers was analyzed by the method of high throughput 16S rRNA sequencing of bacterial genomes. In patients with Parkinson's diseases, changes in the content of 9 genera and 15 species of microorganisms were revealed: reduced content of Dorea, Bacteroides, Prevotella, Faecalibacterium, Bacteroides massiliensis, Stoquefichus massiliensis, Bacteroides coprocola, Blautia glucerasea, Dorea longicatena, Bacteroides dorei, Bacteroides plebeus, Prevotella copri, Coprococcus eutactus, and Ruminococcus callidus, and increased content of Christensenella, Catabacter, Lactobacillus, Oscillospira, Bifidobacterium, Christensenella minuta, Catabacter hongkongensis, Lactobacillus mucosae, Ruminococcus bromii, and Papillibacter cinnamivorans. This microbiological pattern of gut microflora can trigger local inflammation followed by aggregation of α-synuclein and generation of Lewy bodies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 375 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 375 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 57 | 15% |
| Researcher | 50 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 45 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 40 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 21 | 6% |
| Other | 40 | 11% |
| Unknown | 122 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 61 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 43 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 34 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 24 | 6% |
| Other | 42 | 11% |
| Unknown | 139 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 35. 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 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,178,207
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine
#6
of 1,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,050
of 328,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine
#1
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,435 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 328,307 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.