↓ Skip to main content

Dissecting the Molecular Mechanisms of Neurodegenerative Diseases through Network Biology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
161 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
Dissecting the Molecular Mechanisms of Neurodegenerative Diseases through Network Biology
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2017.00166
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jose A. Santiago, Virginie Bottero, Judith A. Potashkin

Abstract

Neurodegenerative diseases are rarely caused by a mutation in a single gene but rather influenced by a combination of genetic, epigenetic and environmental factors. Emerging high-throughput technologies such as RNA sequencing have been instrumental in deciphering the molecular landscape of neurodegenerative diseases, however, the interpretation of such large amounts of data remains a challenge. Network biology has become a powerful platform to integrate multiple omics data to comprehensively explore the molecular networks in the context of health and disease. In this review article, we highlight recent advances in network biology approaches with an emphasis in brain-networks that have provided insights into the molecular mechanisms leading to the most prevalent neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer's (AD), Parkinson's (PD) and Huntington's diseases (HD). We discuss how integrative approaches using multi-omics data from different tissues have been valuable for identifying biomarkers and therapeutic targets. In addition, we discuss the challenges the field of network medicine faces toward the translation of network-based findings into clinically actionable tools for personalized medicine applications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users 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 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 161 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 19%
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Researcher 18 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 44 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 33 20%
Neuroscience 24 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 5%
Computer Science 7 4%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 52 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 June 2017.
All research outputs
#6,674,205
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,620
of 4,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,562
of 315,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#78
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 315,180 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.