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 |
Chatting with the neighbors: crosstalk between Rho-kinase (ROCK) and other signaling pathways for treatment of neurological disorders
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2015.00198 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Niko Hensel, Sebastian Rademacher, Peter Claus |
| Abstract |
ROCK inhibition has been largely applied as a strategy to treat neurodegenerative diseases (NDDs) and promising results have been obtained in the recent years. However, the underlying molecular and cellular mechanisms are not fully understood and different models have been proposed for neurodegenerative disorders. Here, we aim to review the current knowledge obtained for NDDs identifying common mechanisms as well as disease-specific models. In addition to the role of ROCK in different cell types such as neurons and microglia, we focus on the molecular signaling-pathways which mediate the beneficial effects of ROCK. Besides canonical ROCK signaling, modulation of neighboring pathways by non-canonical ROCK-crosstalk is a recurrent pattern in many NDD-model systems and has been suggested to mediate beneficial effects of ROCK-inhibition. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 82 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 11 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 17 | 20% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 15 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 18 June 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#9,457
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,019
of 282,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#100
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 282,057 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.