↓ Skip to main content

Ocular amyloid imaging at the crossroad of Alzheimer’s disease and age-related macular degeneration: implications for diagnosis and therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Ocular amyloid imaging at the crossroad of Alzheimer’s disease and age-related macular degeneration: implications for diagnosis and therapy
Published in
Journal of Neurology, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00415-018-9028-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sally S. Ong, Alan D. Proia, Heather E. Whitson, Sina Farsiu, P. Murali Doraiswamy, Eleonora M. Lad

Abstract

Alzheimer's disease (AD) and age-related macular degeneration (AMD) are important disorders of aging, but significant challenges remain in diagnosis and therapy. Amyloid-beta (Aβ), found in the brain and a defining feature of AD, has also been observed in the retina in both AD and AMD. While current diagnostic modalities for detecting Aβ in the brain are costly or invasive, Aβ in the retina can be noninvasively and conveniently imaged using modern photonic imaging systems such as optical coherence tomography (OCT). Moreover, since many of these retinal changes occur before degenerative changes can be detected in the brain, ocular amyloid biomarkers could be utilized to detect AD as well as AMD in their earliest stages when therapy may be most effective in halting disease progression. Novel technologies to quantify retinal biomarkers have the potential to facilitate early diagnosis and noninvasive monitoring of disease progression with important therapeutic implications.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 13 21%
Unknown 17 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 26%
Neuroscience 7 11%
Psychology 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 24 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 24 June 2019.
All research outputs
#3,249,499
of 23,102,082 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#760
of 4,535 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,517
of 334,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#17
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,102,082 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,535 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 334,872 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.