↓ Skip to main content

Functional muscle ischemia in Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
134 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
Functional muscle ischemia in Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2013.00381
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gail D. Thomas

Abstract

Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy (DMD/BMD) comprise a spectrum of devastating X-linked muscle wasting disease for which there is no treatment. DMD/BMD is caused by mutations in the gene encoding dystrophin, a cytoskeletal protein that stabilizes the muscle membrane and also targets other proteins to the sarcolemma. Among these is the muscle-specific isoform of neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOSμ) which binds spectrin-like repeats within dystrophin's rod domain and the adaptor protein α-syntrophin. Dystrophin deficiency causes loss of sarcolemmal nNOSμ and reduces paracrine signaling of muscle-derived nitric oxide (NO) to the microvasculature, which renders the diseased muscle fibers susceptible to functional muscle ischemia during exercise. Repeated bouts of functional ischemia superimposed on muscle fibers already weakened by dystrophin deficiency result in use-dependent focal muscle injury. Genetic and pharmacologic strategies to boost nNOSμ-NO signaling in dystrophic muscle alleviate functional muscle ischemia and show promise as novel therapeutic interventions for the treatment of DMD/BMD.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Moldova, Republic of 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 131 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 18%
Student > Bachelor 22 16%
Researcher 18 13%
Student > Master 15 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 4%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 32 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 3%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 37 28%
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 06 February 2014.
All research outputs
#18,357,514
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,076
of 13,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,092
of 280,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#227
of 398 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,539 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 280,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 398 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.