↓ Skip to main content

Chronochemistry in neurodegeneration

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Chronochemistry in neurodegeneration
Published in
Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, March 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnmol.2014.00020
Pubmed ID
Authors

Annalisa Pastore, Salvatore Adinolfi

Abstract

The problem of distinguishing causes from effects is not a trivial one, as illustrated by the science fiction writer Isaac Asimov in a novel dedicated to an imaginary compound with surprising "chronochemistry" properties. The problem is particularly important when trying to establish the etiology of diseases. Here, we discuss how the problem reflects on our understanding of disease using two specific examples: Alzheimer's disease (AD) and Friedreich's ataxia (FRDA). We show how the fibrillar aggregates observed in AD were first denied any interest, then to assume a central focus, and to finally recess to be considered the dead-end point of the aggregation pathway. This current view is that the soluble aggregates formed along the aggregation pathway rather than the mature amyliod fiber are the causes of disease, Similarly, we illustrate how the identification of causes and and effects have been important in the study of FRDA. This disease has alternatively been considered as the consequence of oxidative stress, iron precipitation or reduction of iron-sulfur cluster protein context. We illustrate how new tools have recently been established which allow us to follow the development of the disease. We hope that this review may inspire similar studies in other scientific disciplines.

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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 4%
Italy 1 4%
Unknown 22 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 21%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 21%
Neuroscience 3 13%
Chemistry 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 3 13%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 April 2014.
All research outputs
#20,679,283
of 25,402,528 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#2,635
of 3,340 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,213
of 239,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,528 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 3,340 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 239,382 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.