You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Epigenetic upregulation of FKBP5 by aging and stress contributes to NF-κB–driven inflammation and cardiovascular risk
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, May 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1073/pnas.1816847116 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anthony S Zannas, Meiwen Jia, Kathrin Hafner, Jens Baumert, Tobias Wiechmann, Julius C Pape, Janine Arloth, Maik Ködel, Silvia Martinelli, Maria Roitman, Simone Röh, Andreas Haehle, Rebecca T Emeny, Stella Iurato, Tania Carrillo-Roa, Jari Lahti, Katri Räikkönen, Johan G Eriksson, Amanda J Drake, Melanie Waldenberger, Simone Wahl, Sonja Kunze, Susanne Lucae, Bekh Bradley, Christian Gieger, Felix Hausch, Alicia K Smith, Kerry J Ressler, Bertram Müller-Myhsok, Karl-Heinz Ladwig, Theo Rein, Nils C Gassen, Elisabeth B Binder |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 28% |
| Germany | 5 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Georgia | 1 | 3% |
| Finland | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 8 | 28% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 15 | 52% |
| Scientists | 8 | 28% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 261 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 261 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 51 | 20% |
| Researcher | 32 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 7% |
| Other | 33 | 13% |
| Unknown | 74 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 47 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 24 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 7% |
| Psychology | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 38 | 15% |
| Unknown | 86 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. 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 15 March 2024.
All research outputs
#823,980
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#13,306
of 104,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,988
of 368,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#276
of 938 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 104,451 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 368,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 938 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.