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 |
Golgi fragmentation in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, an overview of possible triggers and consequences
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2015.00400 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vinod Sundaramoorthy, Jessica M. Sultana, Julie D. Atkin |
| Abstract |
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) is an invariably fatal neurodegenerative disorder, which specifically targets motor neurons in the brain, brain stem and spinal cord. Whilst the etiology of ALS remains unknown, fragmentation of the Golgi apparatus is detected in ALS patient motor neurons and in animal/cellular disease models. The Golgi is a highly dynamic organelle that acts as a dispatching station for the vesicular transport of secretory/transmembrane proteins. It also mediates autophagy and maintains endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and axonal homeostasis. Both the trigger for Golgi fragmentation and the functional consequences of a fragmented Golgi apparatus in ALS remain unclear. However, recent evidence has highlighted defects in vesicular trafficking as a pathogenic mechanism in ALS. This review summarizes the evidence describing Golgi fragmentation in ALS, with possible links to other disease processes including cellular trafficking, ER stress, defective autophagy, and axonal degeneration. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| Australia | 2 | 29% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 86% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 99 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 9% |
| Researcher | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 30 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 17% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 30 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 20 November 2015.
All research outputs
#2,811,245
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#1,801
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,664
of 295,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#20
of 142 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 295,218 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 142 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.