| Title |
Cholinergic Dysfunction in Parkinson’s Disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11910-013-0377-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martijn L. T. M. Müller, Nicolaas I. Bohnen |
| Abstract |
There is increasing interest in the clinical effects of cholinergic basal forebrain and tegmental pedunculopontine complex (PPN) projection degeneration in Parkinson's disease (PD). Recent evidence supports an expanded role beyond cognitive impairment, including effects on olfaction, mood, REM sleep behavior disorder, and motor functions. Cholinergic denervation is variable in PD without dementia and may contribute to clinical symptom heterogeneity. Early in vivo imaging evidence that impaired cholinergic integrity of the PPN associates with frequent falling in PD is now confirmed by human post-mortem evidence. Brainstem cholinergic lesioning studies in primates confirm the role of the PPN in mobility impairment. Degeneration of basal forebrain cholinergic projections correlates with decreased walking speed. Cumulatively, these findings provide evidence for a new paradigm to explain dopamine-resistant features of mobility impairments in PD. Recognition of the increased clinical role of cholinergic system degeneration may motivate new research to expand indications for cholinergic therapy in PD. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 268 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 266 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 44 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 37 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 46 | 17% |
| Unknown | 57 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 60 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 50 | 19% |
| Psychology | 20 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 30 | 11% |
| Unknown | 76 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 26 January 2021.
All research outputs
#4,102,425
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#232
of 932 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,961
of 197,544 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Neurology and Neuroscience Reports
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 932 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 197,544 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 82% 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 done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.