↓ Skip to main content

High-Fat Diet Induces Periodontitis in Mice through Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) Receptor Signaling: Protective Action of Estrogens

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
70 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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.
Title
High-Fat Diet Induces Periodontitis in Mice through Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) Receptor Signaling: Protective Action of Estrogens
Published in
PLOS ONE, November 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0048220
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vincent Blasco-Baque, Matteo Serino, Jean-Noël Vergnes, Elodie Riant, Pascale Loubieres, Jean-François Arnal, Pierre Gourdy, Michel Sixou, Rémy Burcelin, Philippe Kemoun

Abstract

A fat-enriched diet favors the development of gram negative bacteria in the intestine which is linked to the occurrence of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Interestingly, some pathogenic gram negative bacteria are commonly associated with the development of periodontitis which, like T2D, is characterized by a chronic low-grade inflammation. Moreover, estrogens have been shown to regulate glucose homeostasis via an LPS receptor dependent immune-modulation. In this study, we evaluated whether diet-induced metabolic disease would favor the development of periodontitis in mice. In addition, the regulatory role of estrogens in this process was assessed.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Unknown 126 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 17%
Student > Master 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 23 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 26 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,139,110
of 22,684,168 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#103,584
of 193,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,919
of 184,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,291
of 4,916 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,684,168 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 184,200 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,916 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 52% of its contemporaries.