↓ Skip to main content

Involvement of Mitochondria in Neurodegeneration in Multiple Sclerosis

Overview of attention for article published in Biochemistry, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Involvement of Mitochondria in Neurodegeneration in Multiple Sclerosis
Published in
Biochemistry, July 2018
DOI 10.1134/s0006297918070052
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. S. Kozin, O. G. Kulakova, O. O. Favorova

Abstract

Functional disruption and neuronal loss followed by progressive dysfunction of the nervous system underlies the pathogenesis of numerous disorders defined as "neurodegenerative diseases". Multiple sclerosis, a chronic inflammatory demyelinating disease of the central nervous system resulting in serious neurological dysfunctions and disability, is one of the most common neurodegenerative diseases. Recent studies suggest that disturbances in mitochondrial functioning are key factors leading to neurodegeneration. In this review, we consider data on mitochondrial dysfunctions in multiple sclerosis, which were obtained both with patients and with animal models. The contemporary data indicate that the axonal degeneration in multiple sclerosis largely results from the activation of Ca2+-dependent proteases and from misbalance of ion homeostasis caused by energy deficiency. The genetic studies analyzing association of mitochondrial DNA polymorphic variants in multiple sclerosis suggest the participation of mitochondrial genome variability in the development of this disease, although questions of the involvement of individual genomic variants are far from being resolved.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 14%
Professor 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 12 24%
Unknown 9 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 16 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 December 2018.
All research outputs
#16,053,755
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Biochemistry
#19,041
of 22,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#197,339
of 340,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biochemistry
#66
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,293 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 340,123 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.