↓ Skip to main content

Effective small interfering RNAs and phosphorothioate antisense DNAs have different preferences for target sites in the luciferase mRNAs

Overview of attention for article published in Biochemical & Biophysical Research Communications, July 2003
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
42 patents

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Effective small interfering RNAs and phosphorothioate antisense DNAs have different preferences for target sites in the luciferase mRNAs
Published in
Biochemical & Biophysical Research Communications, July 2003
DOI 10.1016/s0006-291x(03)01024-6
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Antisense DNA target sites can be selected by the accessibility of the mRNA target. It remains unknown whether a mRNA site that is accessible to an antisense DNA is also a good candidate target site for a siRNA. Here, we reported a parallel analysis of 12 pairs of antisense DNAs and siRNA duplexes for their potency to inhibit reporter luciferase activity in mammalian cells, both of the antisense DNA and siRNA agents in a pair being directed to same site in the mRNA. Five siRNAs and two antisense DNAs turned out to be effective, but the sites targeted by those effective siRNAs and antisense DNAs did not overlap. Our results indicated that effective antisense DNAs and siRNAs have different preferences for target sites in the mRNA.

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 25 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 %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 28%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Other 5 20%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 32%
Chemistry 5 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 3 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 07 April 2026.
All research outputs
#3,804,708
of 34,517,289 outputs
Outputs from Biochemical & Biophysical Research Communications
#1,174
of 33,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,884
of 76,390 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biochemical & Biophysical Research Communications
#11
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,517,289 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,123 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 76,390 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.