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 |
CRISPR/Cas9: Implications for Modeling and Therapy of Neurodegenerative Diseases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnmol.2016.00030 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Weili Yang, Zhuchi Tu, Qiang Sun, Xiao-Jiang Li |
| Abstract |
CRISPR/Cas9 is now used widely to genetically modify the genomes of various species. The ability of CRISPR/Cas9 to delete DNA sequences and correct DNA mutations opens up a new avenue to treat genetic diseases that are caused by DNA mutations. In this review, we describe the advantages of using CRISPR/Cas9 to engineer genomic DNAs in animal embryos, as well as in specific regions or cell types in the brain. We also discuss how to apply CRISPR/Cas9 to establish animal models of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson's and Huntington's disease (HD), and to treat these disorders that are caused by genetic mutations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 33% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| Sweden | 1 | 17% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Austria | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 178 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 57 | 32% |
| Student > Master | 28 | 16% |
| Researcher | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Unknown | 35 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 39 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 33 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 14% |
| Unknown | 38 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 15 March 2019.
All research outputs
#1,556,666
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#111
of 2,888 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,729
of 299,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#1
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,888 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 299,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.