↓ Skip to main content

Ongoing controversies surrounding cardiac remodeling: is it black and white—or rather fifty shades of gray?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Ongoing controversies surrounding cardiac remodeling: is it black and white—or rather fifty shades of gray?
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2015.00202
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sebastian Spaich, Hugo A. Katus, Johannes Backs

Abstract

Cardiac remodeling describes the heart's multimodal response to a myriad of external or intrinsic stimuli and stressors most of which are probably only incompletely elucidated to date. Over many years the signaling molecules involved in these remodeling processes have been dichotomized according to a classic antagonistic view of black and white, i.e., attributed either a solely maladaptive or entirely beneficial character. By dissecting controversies, recent developments and shifts in perspective surrounding the three major cardiac signaling molecules calcineurin (Cn), protein kinase A (PKA) and calcium/calmodulin-dependent kinase II (CaMKII), this review challenges this dualistic view and advocates the nature and dignity of each of these key mediators of cardiac remodeling as a multilayered, highly context-sensitive and sophisticated continuum that can be markedly swayed and influenced by a multitude of environmental factors and crosstalk mechanisms. Furthermore this review delineates the importance and essential contributions of degradation and proteolysis to cardiac plasticity and homeostasis and finally aims to integrate the various aspects of protein synthesis and turnover into a comprehensive picture.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 23%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,264,328
of 24,998,746 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#5,437
of 15,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,993
of 364,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#39
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,998,746 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 364,470 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 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.