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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Molecular Basis of Renal Adaptation in a Murine Model of Congenital Obstructive Nephropathy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0072762 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brian Becknell, Ashley R. Carpenter, Jordan L. Allen, Michael E. Wilhide, Susan E. Ingraham, David S. Hains, Kirk M. McHugh |
| Abstract |
Congenital obstructive nephropathy is a common cause of chronic kidney disease and a leading indication for renal transplant in children. The cellular and molecular responses of the kidney to congenital obstruction are incompletely characterized. In this study, we evaluated global transcription in kidneys with graded hydronephrosis in the megabladder (mgb (-/-)) mouse to better understand the pathophysiology of congenital obstructive nephropathy. Three primary pathways associated with kidney remodeling/repair were induced in mgb (-/-) kidneys independent of the degree of hydronephrosis. These pathways included retinoid signaling, steroid hormone metabolism, and renal response to injury. Urothelial proliferation and the expression of genes with roles in the integrity and maintenance of the renal urothelium were selectively increased in mgb (-/-) kidneys. Ngal/Lcn2, a marker of acute kidney injury, was elevated in 36% of kidneys with higher grades of hydronephrosis. Evaluation of Ngal(high) versus Ngal(low) kidneys identified the expression of several novel candidate markers of renal injury. This study indicates that the development of progressive hydronephrosis in mgb (-/-) mice results in renal adaptation that includes significant changes in the morphology and potential functionality of the renal urothelium. These observations will permit the development of novel biomarkers and therapeutic approaches to progressive renal injury in the context of congenital obstruction. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Researcher | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 12% |
| Psychology | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 05 September 2013.
All research outputs
#4,157,490
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#58,935
of 193,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,732
of 196,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,241
of 5,049 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,977 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 196,876 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,049 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 74% of its contemporaries.