↓ Skip to main content

Is NADH Effective in the Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease?

Overview of attention for article published in Drugs & Aging, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#34 of 1,303)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
2 X users
wikipedia
8 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Is NADH Effective in the Treatment of Parkinson’s Disease?
Published in
Drugs & Aging, August 2012
DOI 10.2165/00002512-199813040-00002
Pubmed ID
Authors

Russell H. Swerdlow

Abstract

Most Parkinson's disease (PD) treatments palliate symptoms by increasing nigrostriatal dopaminergic tone. A unique strategy for accomplishing this pharmacological end-point proposes using reduced nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH) to boost endogenous dopamine production, since NADH indirectly supplies reducing equivalents to the rate-limiting, tyrosine hydroxylase-catalysed step of dopamine synthesis. Support for using NADH in PD treatment includes claims that NADH stimulates tyrosine hydroxylase and dopamine biosynthesis in tissue culture and humans, as well as case series associating intravenous and oral NADH administration with PD rating scale improvements. Theoretical and practical arguments against NADH include underlying NADH disposal impairment in PD and failure of a placebo-controlled trial to show any clear benefit. While NADH may yet prove to ameliorate parkinsonism, recommendations for its use in PD are premature.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 16%
Professor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 6 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 7 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 16 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,054,151
of 25,721,020 outputs
Outputs from Drugs & Aging
#34
of 1,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,816
of 188,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drugs & Aging
#8
of 374 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,721,020 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 1,303 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 188,537 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 374 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 97% of its contemporaries.