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 |
Non-Coding RNAs Regulating Morphine Function: With Emphasis on the In vivo and In vitro Functions of miR-190
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fgene.2012.00113 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hui Zheng, Ping-Yee Law, Horace H. Loh |
| Abstract |
Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), especially microRNAs, are reported to be involved in a variety of biological processes, including several processes related to drug addiction. It has been suggested that the biological functions of opioids, one typical type of addictive drugs, are regulated by ncRNAs. In the current review, we examine a variety of mechanisms through which ncRNAs could regulate μ-opioid receptor (OPRM1) activities and thereby contribute to the development of opioid addiction. Using miR-23b as an example, we present the possible ways in which ncRNA-mediated regulation of OPRM1 expression could impact opioid addiction. Using miR-190 as an example, we demonstrate the critical roles played by ncRNAs in the signal cascade from receptor to systemic responses, including the possible modulation of adult neurogenesis and in vivo contextual memory. After discussing the possible targets of ncRNAs involved in the development of opioid addiction, we summarize the mechanisms underlying the interaction between ncRNAs and opioid addiction and present suggestions for further study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 3 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 41% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 09 July 2012.
All research outputs
#5,614,838
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,598
of 11,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,092
of 244,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#41
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,727 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 244,068 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.