↓ Skip to main content

Abnormal blink reflex recovery cycle in manifesting and nonmanifesting carriers of the DYT1 gene mutation

Overview of attention for article published in NeuroReport, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Abnormal blink reflex recovery cycle in manifesting and nonmanifesting carriers of the DYT1 gene mutation
Published in
NeuroReport, August 2016
DOI 10.1097/wnr.0000000000000653
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fong, Po-Yu, Edwards, Mark J, Lu, Chin-Song, Chen, Rou-Shayn, Rothwell, John C, Bhatia, Kailash P, Huang, Ying-Zu, Fong, P-Y, Edwards, MJ, Lu, C-S, Chen, R-S, Rothwell, JC, Bhatia, KP, Huang, Y-Z

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the brainstem function in DYT1 carriers manifesting clinical dystonia (MDYT1) and those without clinical symptoms (NMDYT1). Motor cortical inhibition and plasticity were found to be abnormal in MDYT1, whereas these were less abnormal in NMDYT1. However, the spinal reciprocal inhibition was abnormal in MDYT1, but normal in NMDYT1. Moreover, protein accumulation and perinuclear inclusion bodies were found in the brainstem, but not in other brain areas, in DYT1 patients. Therefore, we designed this study to investigate the brainstem physiology using the blink reflex (BR) recovery cycle test in MDYT1 and NMDYT1. We recruited eight MDYT1, five NMDYT1, and nine age-matched healthy controls. The BR recovery cycle was assessed with paired stimuli that induced the BR in a random order at interstimulus intervals of 250, 500, and 1000 ms. A two-way analysis of variance showed a significant difference between MDYT1, NMDYT1, and the healthy control (P=0.004). Post-hoc analysis showed that this was because of a significantly lower inhibition of R2 in MDYT1 and NMDYT1 compared with the controls (two-way analysis of variance: P=0.003 and 0.021, respectively). There was no difference between MDYT1 and NMDYT1 (P=0.224). The tested brainstem circuits were equally involved in MDYT1 and NMDYT1. The finding is in agreement with the pathological findings in DYT1 carriers. Together with previous findings in the motor cortex and the spinal cord, the brainstem may lie closer to the pathogenesis of dystonia than the motor cortex in DYT1 gene carriers.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 1 20%
Student > Postgraduate 1 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 20%
Unspecified 1 20%
Other 0 0%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 2 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 20%
Psychology 1 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#7,376,561
of 11,843,218 outputs
Outputs from NeuroReport
#1,688
of 2,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,692
of 265,383 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroReport
#13
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,843,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,718 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 265,383 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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.