↓ Skip to main content

Strategies for developing novel therapeutics for sensorineural hearing loss

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Strategies for developing novel therapeutics for sensorineural hearing loss
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2014.00206
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takayuki Nakagawa

Abstract

Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) is a common disability in the world; however, at present, options for the pharmacological treatment of SNHL are very limited. Previous studies involving human temporal bone analyses have revealed that the degeneration of the cochlea is a common mechanism of SNHL. A major problem for the development of novel pharmacotherapy for SNHL has been the limited regeneration capacity in mammalian cochlear cells. However, recent progress in basic studies has led to several effective strategies for the induction of regeneration in the mammalian cochlea, in accordance with the stage of degeneration. In addition, recent advances in the identification of human deafness genes and their characterization in mouse models have elucidated cellular and/or molecular mechanisms of SNHL, which will contribute to clarify molecular targets of pharmacotherapy for treatment of SNHL.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Hungary 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Egypt 1 2%
Unknown 39 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 21%
Student > Master 6 14%
Other 6 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 7 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Engineering 3 7%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 9 21%
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 13 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,407,124
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#2,624
of 16,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,672
of 225,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#7
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,010 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 225,899 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.