↓ Skip to main content

The Enemy within: Propagation of Aberrant Corticostriatal Learning to Cortical Function in Parkinson’s Disease

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
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 (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
The Enemy within: Propagation of Aberrant Corticostriatal Learning to Cortical Function in Parkinson’s Disease
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2013.00134
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeff A. Beeler, Giselle Petzinger, Michael W. Jakowec

Abstract

Motor dysfunction in Parkinson's disease is believed to arise primarily from pathophysiology in the dorsal striatum and its related corticostriatal and thalamostriatal circuits during progressive dopamine denervation. One function of these circuits is to provide a filter that selectively facilitates or inhibits cortical activity to optimize cortical processing, making motor responses rapid and efficient. Corticostriatal synaptic plasticity mediates the learning that underlies this performance-optimizing filter. Under dopamine denervation, corticostriatal plasticity is altered, resulting in aberrant learning that induces inappropriate basal ganglia filtering that impedes rather than optimizes cortical processing. Human imaging suggests that increased cortical activity may compensate for striatal dysfunction in PD patients. In this Perspective article, we consider how aberrant learning at corticostriatal synapses may impair cortical processing and learning and undermine potential cortical compensatory mechanisms. Blocking or remediating aberrant corticostriatal plasticity may protect cortical function and support cortical compensatory mechanisms mitigating the functional decline associated with progressive dopamine denervation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Brazil 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Unknown 74 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 20%
Researcher 14 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Other 4 5%
Other 18 23%
Unknown 12 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 22 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 19%
Psychology 11 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 13%
Unspecified 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 18 23%
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 29 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,760,611
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#6,055
of 11,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,341
of 280,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#65
of 210 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,628 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 280,761 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 210 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 64% of its contemporaries.