↓ Skip to main content

Days to criterion as an indicator of toxicity associated with human Alzheimer amyloid‐β oligomers

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Neurology, August 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
11 patents
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
160 Mendeley
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
Days to criterion as an indicator of toxicity associated with human Alzheimer amyloid‐β oligomers
Published in
Annals of Neurology, August 2010
DOI 10.1002/ana.22052
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that high molecular weight soluble oligomeric Abeta (oAbeta) assemblies (also known as Abeta-derived diffusible ligands, or ADDLs) may represent a primary neurotoxic basis for cognitive failure in Alzheimer disease (AD). To date, most in vivo studies of oAbeta/ADDLs have involved injection of assemblies purified from the cerebrospinal fluid of human subjects with AD or from the conditioned media of Abeta-secreting cells into experimental animals. We sought to study the bioactivities of endogenously formed oAbeta/ADDLs generated in situ from the physiological processing of human amyloid precursor protein (APP) and presenitin1 (PS1) transgenes.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 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 2 1%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Norway 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 153 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 20%
Researcher 27 17%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Student > Master 14 9%
Professor 9 6%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 33 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 24%
Neuroscience 23 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 9%
Engineering 6 4%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 37 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 26 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,775,093
of 30,697,671 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Neurology
#1,254
of 6,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,821
of 127,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Neurology
#10
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 30,697,671 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,426 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 127,474 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 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 71% of its contemporaries.