↓ Skip to main content

Linking hnRNP Function to ALS and FTD Pathology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
185 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
Linking hnRNP Function to ALS and FTD Pathology
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00326
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria D. Purice, J. Paul Taylor

Abstract

Following years of rapid progress identifying the genetic underpinnings of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and related diseases such as frontotemporal dementia (FTD), remarkable consistencies have emerged pointing to perturbed biology of heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins (hnRNPs) as a central driver of pathobiology. To varying extents these RNA-binding proteins are deposited in pathological inclusions in affected tissues in ALS and FTD. Moreover, mutations in hnRNPs account for a significant number of familial cases of ALS and FTD. Here we review the normal function and potential pathogenic contribution of TDP-43, FUS, hnRNP A1, hnRNP A2B1, MATR3, and TIA1 to disease. We highlight recent evidence linking the low complexity sequence domains (LCDs) of these hnRNPs to the formation of membraneless organelles and discuss how alterations in the dynamics of these organelles could contribute to disease. In particular, we discuss the various roles of disease-associated hnRNPs in stress granule assembly and disassembly, and examine the emerging hypothesis that disease-causing mutations in these proteins lead to accumulation of persistent stress granules.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 185 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 46 25%
Researcher 24 13%
Student > Bachelor 19 10%
Student > Master 13 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 4%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 54 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 56 30%
Neuroscience 27 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 6%
Chemical Engineering 2 1%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 62 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 May 2018.
All research outputs
#8,478,408
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,367
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,241
of 340,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#122
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
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 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 340,954 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 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 240 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.