↓ Skip to main content

Type 3 Diabetes: Cross Talk between Differentially Regulated Proteins of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Alzheimer’s Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Type 3 Diabetes: Cross Talk between Differentially Regulated Proteins of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Alzheimer’s Disease
Published in
Scientific Reports, May 2016
DOI 10.1038/srep25589
Pubmed ID
Authors

Khyati Mittal, Ruchi Jakhmola Mani, Deepshikha Pande Katare

Abstract

Type 3 Diabetes (T3D) is a neuroendocrine disorder that represents the progression of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) to Alzheimer's disease (AD). T3D contributes in the increase of the total load of Alzheimer's patients worldwide. The protein network based strategies were used for the analysis of protein interactions and hypothesis was derived describing the possible routes of communications among proteins. The hypothesis provides the insight on the probable mechanism of the disease progression for T3D. The current study also suggests that insulin degrading enzyme (IDE) could be the major player which holds the capacity to shift T2DM to T3D by altering metabolic pathways like regulation of beta-cell development, negative regulation of PI3K/AKT pathways and amyloid beta degradation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Macao 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 154 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 32 21%
Student > Master 26 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 15%
Researcher 22 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 20 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 29 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 17%
Neuroscience 14 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 4%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 29 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 17 November 2016.
All research outputs
#1,106,218
of 12,770,195 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#9,566
of 59,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,038
of 263,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#321
of 1,871 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,770,195 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 59,904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 263,825 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,871 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.