↓ Skip to main content

Functional Evaluations of Genes Disrupted in Patients with Tourette’s Disorder

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
33 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 Evaluations of Genes Disrupted in Patients with Tourette’s Disorder
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nawei Sun, Jay A. Tischfield, Robert A. King, Gary A. Heiman

Abstract

Tourette's disorder (TD) is a highly heritable neurodevelopmental disorder with complex genetic architecture and unclear neuropathology. Disruptions of particular genes have been identified in subsets of TD patients. However, none of the findings have been replicated, probably due to the complex and heterogeneous genetic architecture of TD that involves both common and rare variants. To understand the etiology of TD, functional analyses are required to characterize the molecular and cellular consequences caused by mutations in candidate genes. Such molecular and cellular alterations may converge into common biological pathways underlying the heterogeneous genetic etiology of TD patients. Herein, we review specific genes implicated in TD etiology, discuss the functions of these genes in the mammalian central nervous system and the corresponding behavioral anomalies exhibited in animal models, and importantly, review functional analyses that can be performed to evaluate the role(s) that the genetic disruptions might play in TD. Specifically, the functional assays include novel cell culture systems, genome editing techniques, bioinformatics approaches, transcriptomic analyses, and genetically modified animal models applied or developed to study genes associated with TD or with other neurodevelopmental and neuropsychiatric disorders. By describing methods used to study diseases with genetic architecture similar to TD, we hope to develop a systematic framework for investigating the etiology of TD and related disorders.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 24%
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 21%
Psychology 3 9%
Neuroscience 3 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 21%
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 09 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,438,457
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#6,860
of 9,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,197
of 400,364 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#45
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 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 9,976 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 400,364 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.