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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Clinical proteomics of enervated neurons
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Proteomics, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12014-016-9112-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohor Biplab Sengupta, Arunabha Chakrabarti, Suparna Saha, Debashis Mukhopadhyay |
| Abstract |
The dynamic field of neurosciences entails ever increasing search for molecular mechanisms of disease states, especially in the domain of neurodegenerative disorders. The previous century heralded the techniques in proteomics when indexing of the human proteomes relating to various disease conditions became important. Early stage research in certain diseases or pathological conditions requires a more holistic approach of first discovering the proteins of interest for the condition. Despite its limitations, proteomics is one of the most powerful techniques available to us today to dissect the molecular scenario in a particular disease situation. In this review we will discuss about the current clinical research in neurodegenerative disorders that employ proteomics techniques. We will specifically focus on our understanding of Alzheimer's disease, traumatic spinal cord injury and neuromyelitis optica. Discussions will include ongoing worldwide research in these areas, research in India and specifically our laboratory in these domains of neurodegenerative conditions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 21% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 14% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 14% |
| Engineering | 2 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 7% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 13 May 2016.
All research outputs
#2,711,573
of 22,867,327 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Proteomics
#23
of 285 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,934
of 298,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Proteomics
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,867,327 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 285 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 91% 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 298,930 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 84% of its contemporaries.
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. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.