↓ Skip to main content

Why AMD is a disease of ageing and not of development: mechanisms and insights

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, July 2014
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 (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Why AMD is a disease of ageing and not of development: mechanisms and insights
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2014.00151
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kaushal Sharma, Neel Kamal Sharma, Akshay Anand

Abstract

Ageing disorders can be defined as the progressive and cumulative outcome of several defective cellular mechanisms as well as metabolic pathways, consequently resulting in degeneration. Environment plays an important role in its pathogenesis. In contrast, developmental disorders arise from inherited mutations and usually the role of environmental factors in development of disease is minimal. Age related macular degeneration (AMD) is one such retinal degenerative disorder which starts with the progression of age. Metabolism plays an important role in initiation of such diseases of ageing. Cholesterol metabolism and their oxidized products like 7-ketocholesterol have been shown to adversely impact retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) cells. These molecules can initiate mitochondrial apoptotic processes and also influence the complements factors and expression of angiogenic proteins like VEGF etc. In this review we highlight why and how AMD is an ageing disorder and not a developmental disease substantiated by disrupted cholesterol metabolism common to several age related diseases.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 54 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 15%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 8 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 30 July 2014.
All research outputs
#3,588,381
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#1,903
of 4,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,630
of 225,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#13
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,747 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 225,813 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 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.