↓ Skip to main content

Amyloid beta receptors responsible for neurotoxicity and cellular defects in Alzheimer’s disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
Title
Amyloid beta receptors responsible for neurotoxicity and cellular defects in Alzheimer’s disease
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, August 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00018-014-1706-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tae-In Kam, Youngdae Gwon, Yong-Keun Jung

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common neurodegenerative disease. Although a major cause of AD is the accumulation of amyloid-β (Aβ) peptide that induces neuronal loss and cognitive impairments, our understanding of its neurotoxic mechanisms is limited. Recent studies have identified putative Aβ-binding receptors that mediate Aβ neurotoxicity in cells and models of AD. Once Aβ interacts with a receptor, a toxic signal is transduced into neurons, resulting in cellular defects including endoplasmic reticulum stress and mitochondrial dysfunction. In addition, Aβ can also be internalized into neurons through unidentified Aβ receptors and induces malfunction of subcellular organelles, which explains some part of Aβ neurotoxicity. Understanding the neurotoxic signaling initiated by Aβ-receptor binding and cellular defects provide insight into new therapeutic windows for AD. In the present review, we summarize the findings on Aβ-binding receptors and the neurotoxicity of oligomeric Aβ.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 89 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 26%
Student > Master 21 23%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Researcher 8 9%
Other 7 8%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 9 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 20%
Neuroscience 13 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Physics and Astronomy 3 3%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 11 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 September 2014.
All research outputs
#16,031,680
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#3,071
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,969
of 237,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#26
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 237,526 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.