| Title |
Outdoor Ambient Air Pollution and Neurodegenerative Diseases: the Neuroinflammation Hypothesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Environmental Health Reports, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40572-017-0142-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard L. Jayaraj, Eric A. Rodriguez, Yi Wang, Michelle L. Block |
| Abstract |
Accumulating research indicates that ambient outdoor air pollution impacts the brain and may affect neurodegenerative diseases, yet the potential underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. The neuroinflammation hypothesis holds that elevation of cytokines and reactive oxygen species in the brain mediates the deleterious effects of urban air pollution on the central nervous system (CNS). Studies in human and animal research document that neuroinflammation occurs in response to several inhaled pollutants. Microglia are a prominent source of cytokines and reactive oxygen species in the brain, implicated in the progressive neuron damage in diverse neurodegenerative diseases, and activated by inhaled components of urban air pollution through both direct and indirect pathways. The MAC1-NOX2 pathway has been identified as a mechanism through which microglia respond to different forms of air pollution, suggesting a potential common deleterious pathway. Multiple direct and indirect pathways in response to air pollution exposure likely interact in concert to exert CNS effects. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 160 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 17% |
| Researcher | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 10% |
| Unknown | 45 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 22 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 10 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 42 | 26% |
| Unknown | 54 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 28 September 2022.
All research outputs
#1,341,612
of 23,426,104 outputs
Outputs from Current Environmental Health Reports
#58
of 330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,847
of 310,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Environmental Health Reports
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,426,104 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 330 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 310,793 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 69% of its contemporaries.