↓ Skip to main content

Lateral Habenula Gone Awry in Depression: Bridging Cellular Adaptations With Therapeutics

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Lateral Habenula Gone Awry in Depression: Bridging Cellular Adaptations With Therapeutics
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00485
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alvaro Nuno-Perez, Anna Tchenio, Manuel Mameli, Salvatore Lecca

Abstract

Depression is a highly heterogeneous disease characterized by symptoms spanning from anhedonia and behavioral despair to social withdrawal and learning deficit. Such diversity of behavioral phenotypes suggests that discrete neural circuits may underlie precise aspects of the disease, rendering its treatment an unmet challenge for modern neuroscience. Evidence from humans and animal models indicate that the lateral habenula (LHb), an epithalamic center devoted to processing aversive stimuli, is aberrantly affected during depression. This raises the hypothesis that rescuing maladaptations within this nucleus may be a potential way to, at least partially, treat aspects of mood disorders. In this review article, we will discuss pre-clinical and clinical evidence highlighting the role of LHb and its cellular adaptations in depression. We will then describe interventional approaches aiming to rescue LHb dysfunction and ultimately ameliorate depressive symptoms. Altogether, we aim to merge the mechanistic-, circuit-, and behavioral-level knowledge obtained about LHb maladaptations in depression to build a general framework that might prove valuable for potential therapeutic interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Master 4 6%
Other 2 3%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 28 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 19 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Psychology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 29 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,283,318
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#5,573
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,617
of 340,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#126
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 340,859 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.