↓ Skip to main content

Does regulation of skeletal muscle function involve circulating microRNAs?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
114 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
Does regulation of skeletal muscle function involve circulating microRNAs?
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2014.00039
Pubmed ID
Authors

Wataru Aoi, Kunihiro Sakuma

Abstract

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are small non-coding RNAs involved in post-transcriptional gene regulation. Recently, growing evidence has shown that miRNAs are taken in by intracellular exosomes, secreted into circulation, and taken up by other cells. Circulating levels of several miRNAs are changed in diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases; therefore, they are suggested to regulate functions of the recipient cells by modulating protein expression. Circulating miRNAs (c-miRNAs) may also modulate skeletal muscle function in physiological and pathological conditions. It has been suggested that acute and chronic exercise transiently or adaptively changes the level of c-miRNAs, thus post-transcriptionally regulating proteins associated with energy metabolism, myogenesis, and angiogenesis. Circulating levels of several miRNAs that are enriched in muscle are altered in muscle disorders and may be involved in their development and progression. In addition, such c-miRNAs may be useful as biomarkers to determine various interactions between tissues and also to reflect athletic performance, physical fatigue, incidence risk, and development of diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Brazil 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 108 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 19%
Researcher 22 19%
Student > Master 14 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Student > Postgraduate 7 6%
Other 24 21%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 16%
Sports and Recreations 10 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 26 23%
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 19 June 2015.
All research outputs
#6,937,459
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,334
of 13,552 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,068
of 305,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#35
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,552 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 305,223 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.