↓ Skip to main content

Diseases associated with leaky hemichannels

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Diseases associated with leaky hemichannels
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fncel.2015.00267
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mauricio A. Retamal, Edison P. Reyes, Isaac E. García, Bernardo Pinto, Agustín D. Martínez, Carlos González

Abstract

Hemichannels (HCs) and gap junction channels (GJCs) formed by protein subunits called connexins (Cxs) are major pathways for intercellular communication. While HCs connect the intracellular compartment with the extracellular milieu, GJCs allow the interchange of molecules between cytoplasm of two contacting cells. Under physiological conditions, HCs are mostly closed, but they can open under certain stimuli allowing the release of autocrine and paracrine molecules. Moreover, some pathological conditions, like ischemia or other inflammation conditions, significantly increase HCs activity. In addition, some mutations in Cx genes associated with human diseases, such as deafness or cataracts, lead to the formation of more active HCs or "leaky HCs." In this article we will revise cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying the appearance of leaky HCs, and the consequences of their expression in different cellular systems and animal models, in seeking a common pattern or pathological mechanism of disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 24%
Researcher 14 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 14 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 20%
Neuroscience 6 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 17 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,950,934
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#2,024
of 4,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,246
of 262,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#51
of 134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,242 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 262,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.