| Title |
Association between intracellular infectious agents and Tourette’s syndrome
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, November 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00406-009-0084-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniela Krause, Judith Matz, Elif Weidinger, Jenny Wagner, Agnes Wildenauer, Michael Obermeier, Michael Riedel, Norbert Müller |
| Abstract |
The underlying pathophysiological mechanisms in Tourette's syndrome (TS) are still unclear. Increasing evidence supports the involvement of infections, possibly on the basis of an altered immune status. Not only streptococci but also other infectious agents may be involved. This study investigates the association between the neurotrophic agents Chlamydia, Toxoplasma and TS. 32 patients with TS and 30 healthy matched controls were included. For each individual, IgA/IgG antibody titers against Chlamydia trachomatis/pneumoniae and Toxoplasma gondii were evaluated and analyzed with Fisher's exact test. We found a significantly higher rate of TS patients with elevated antibody titers against Chlamydia trachomatis (P = 0.017) as compared to controls. A trend toward a higher prevalence in the Tourette's group was shown for Toxoplasma (P = 0.069). In conclusion, within the TS patients a higher rate of antibody titers could be demonstrated, pointing to a possible role of Chlamydia and Toxoplasma in the pathogenesis of tic disorders. Because none of these agents has been linked with TS to date, a hypothesis is that infections could contribute to TS by triggering an immune response. It still remains unclear whether tic symptoms are partly due to the infection or to changes in the immune balance caused by an infection. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 18% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 24% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 18% |
| Psychology | 5 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 30 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,856,604
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#462
of 1,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,186
of 96,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,243 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 96,778 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.