↓ Skip to main content

Paradoxical effects of increased expression of PGC-1α on muscle mitochondrial function and insulin-stimulated muscle glucose metabolism

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
228 Mendeley
citeulike
8 CiteULike
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.
Article details
Title
Paradoxical effects of increased expression of PGC-1α on muscle mitochondrial function and insulin-stimulated muscle glucose metabolism
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, December 2008
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0810339105
Pubmed ID
Authors

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 228 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Trinidad and Tobago 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Iraq 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 215 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 21%
Student > Master 22 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 6%
Other 46 20%
Unknown 33 14%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 86 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 43 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 11%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Sports and Recreations 6 3%
Other 15 7%
Unknown 48 21%
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 06 November 2021.
All research outputs
#10,678,245
of 34,763,505 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#78,921
of 119,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,673
of 251,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#478
of 712 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,763,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 119,650 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 251,208 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 712 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.