↓ Skip to main content

Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase in Vascular Physiology and Diseases

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, June 2016
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 (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
146 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
Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase in Vascular Physiology and Diseases
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00206
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eduardo D. Costa, Bruno A. Rezende, Steyner F. Cortes, Virginia S. Lemos

Abstract

The family of nitric oxide synthases (NOS) has significant importance in various physiological mechanisms and is also involved in many pathological processes. Three NOS isoforms have been identified: neuronal NOS (nNOS or NOS 1), endothelial NOS (eNOS or NOS 3), and an inducible NOS (iNOS or NOS 2). Both nNOS and eNOS are constitutively expressed. Classically, eNOS is considered the main isoform involved in the control of the vascular function. However, more recent studies have shown that nNOS is present in the vascular endothelium and importantly contributes to the maintenance of the homeostasis of the cardiovascular system. In physiological conditions, besides nitric oxide (NO), nNOS also produces hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) and superoxide ([Formula: see text]) considered as key mediators in non-neuronal cells signaling. This mini-review highlights recent scientific releases on the role of nNOS in vascular homeostasis and cardiovascular disorders such as hypertension and atherosclerosis.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 144 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 19%
Student > Master 25 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 3%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 50 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 8%
Neuroscience 9 6%
Other 23 16%
Unknown 52 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 July 2021.
All research outputs
#13,397,503
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,565
of 13,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,963
of 339,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#51
of 166 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 339,291 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 166 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 68% of its contemporaries.