↓ Skip to main content

Comparisons of serum miRNA expression profiles in patients with diabetic retinopathy and type 2 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Comparisons of serum miRNA expression profiles in patients with diabetic retinopathy and type 2 diabetes mellitus
Published in
Clinics, February 2017
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2017(02)08
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jianping Ma, Jufang Wang, Yanfen Liu, Changyi Wang, Donghui Duan, Nanjia Lu, Kaiyue Wang, Lu Zhang, Kaibo Gu, Sihan Chen, Tao Zhang, Dingyun You, Liyuan Han

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the expression levels of serum miRNAs in diabetic retinopathy and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Serum miRNA expression profiles from diabetic retinopathy cases (type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with diabetic retinopathy) and type 2 diabetes mellitus controls (type 2 diabetes mellitus patients without diabetic retinopathy) were examined by miRNA-specific microarray analysis. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to validate the significantly differentially expressed serum miRNAs from the microarray analysis of 45 diabetic retinopathy cases and 45 age-, sex-, body mass index- and duration-of-diabetes-matched type 2 diabetes mellitus controls. The relative changes in serum miRNA expression levels were analyzed using the 2-ΔΔCt method. A total of 5 diabetic retinopathy cases and 5 type 2 diabetes mellitus controls were included in the miRNA-specific microarray analysis. The serum levels of miR-3939 and miR-1910-3p differed significantly between the two groups in the screening stage; however, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction did not reveal significant differences in miRNA expression for 45 diabetic retinopathy cases and their matched type 2 diabetes mellitus controls. Our findings indicate that miR-3939 and miR-1910-3p may not play important roles in the development of diabetic retinopathy; however, studies with a larger sample size are needed to confirm our findings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 15 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 21 45%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#667
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,848
of 424,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#6
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. 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 424,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.