| Title |
Advances and Limitations of Current Epigenetic Studies Investigating Mammalian Axonal Regeneration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Neurotherapeutics, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13311-018-0636-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ilaria Palmisano, Simone Di Giovanni |
| Abstract |
Axonal regeneration relies on the expression of regenerative associated genes within a coordinated transcriptional programme, which is finely tuned as a result of the activation of several regenerative signalling pathways. In mammals, this chain of events occurs in neurons following peripheral axonal injury, however it fails upon axonal injury in the central nervous system, such as in the spinal cord and the brain. Accumulating evidence has been suggesting that epigenetic control is a key factor to initiate and sustain the regenerative transcriptional response and that it might contribute to regenerative success versus failure. This review will discuss experimental evidence so far showing a role for epigenetic regulation in models of peripheral and central nervous system axonal injury. It will also propose future directions to fill key knowledge gaps and to test whether epigenetic control might indeed discriminate between regenerative success and failure. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 56 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 14 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 16 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
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 13 March 2019.
All research outputs
#14,920,631
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Neurotherapeutics
#961
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,414
of 342,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurotherapeutics
#18
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 342,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.