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 |
Correlative Light Electron Microscopy: Connecting Synaptic Structure and Function
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Synaptic Neuroscience, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnsyn.2016.00028 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isabell Begemann, Milos Galic |
| Abstract |
Many core paradigms of contemporary neuroscience are based on information obtained by electron or light microscopy. Intriguingly, these two imaging techniques are often viewed as complementary, yet separate entities. Recent technological advancements in microscopy techniques, labeling tools, and fixation or preparation procedures have fueled the development of a series of hybrid approaches that allow correlating functional fluorescence microscopy data and ultrastructural information from electron micrographs from a singular biological event. As correlative light electron microscopy (CLEM) approaches become increasingly accessible, long-standing neurobiological questions regarding structure-function relation are being revisited. In this review, we will survey what developments in electron and light microscopy have spurred the advent of correlative approaches, highlight the most relevant CLEM techniques that are currently available, and discuss its potential and limitations with respect to neuronal and synapse-specific applications. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 181 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 181 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 22% |
| Researcher | 34 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 20 | 11% |
| Unknown | 44 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 41 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 32 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 32 | 18% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 7 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 42 | 23% |
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 14 June 2023.
All research outputs
#1,699,874
of 23,856,830 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Synaptic Neuroscience
#19
of 433 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,338
of 347,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Synaptic Neuroscience
#1
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,856,830 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 433 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 347,100 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 12 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 99% of its contemporaries.