↓ Skip to main content

Molecular imaging of levodopa-induced dyskinesias

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Molecular imaging of levodopa-induced dyskinesias
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, February 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00018-015-1854-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Flavia Niccolini, Lorenzo Rocchi, Marios Politis

Abstract

Levodopa-induced dyskinesias (LIDs) occur in the majority of patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) following years of levodopa treatment. The pathophysiology underlying LIDs in PD is poorly understood, and current treatments generate only minor benefits for the patients. Studies with positron emission tomography (PET) molecular imaging have demonstrated that in advanced PD patients, levodopa administration induces sharp increases in striatal dopamine levels, which correlate with LIDs severity. Fluctuations in striatal dopamine levels could be the result of the attenuated buffering ability in the dopaminergically denervated striatum. Lines of evidence from PET studies indicate that serotonergic terminals could also be responsible for the development of LIDs in PD by aberrantly processing exogenous levodopa and by releasing dopamine in a dysregulated manner from the serotonergic terminals. Additionally, other downstream mechanisms involving glutamatergic, cannabinoid, opioid, cholinergic, adenosinergic, and noradrenergic systems may contribute in the development of LIDs. In this article, we review the findings from preclinical, clinical, and molecular imaging studies, which have contributed to our understanding the pathophysiology of LIDs in PD.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 5%
France 1 2%
Unknown 54 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 19%
Other 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 10 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 24%
Psychology 8 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 7%
Chemistry 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 17 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 12 April 2023.
All research outputs
#6,614,501
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#1,411
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,454
of 389,649 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#14
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 389,649 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.