↓ Skip to main content

GABAergic Mechanisms in Schizophrenia: Linking Postmortem and In Vivo Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Readers on

mendeley
286 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
GABAergic Mechanisms in Schizophrenia: Linking Postmortem and In Vivo Studies
Published in
Frontiers in Psychiatry, August 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00118
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeroen C. de Jonge, Christiaan H. Vinkers, Hilleke E. Hulshoff Pol, Anouk Marsman

Abstract

Schizophrenia is a psychiatric disorder characterized by hallucinations, delusions, disorganized thinking, and impairments in cognitive functioning. Evidence from postmortem studies suggests that alterations in cortical γ-aminobutyric acid (GABAergic) neurons contribute to the clinical features of schizophrenia. In vivo measurement of brain GABA levels using magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) offers the possibility to provide more insight into the relationship between problems in GABAergic neurotransmission and clinical symptoms of schizophrenia patients. This study reviews and links alterations in the GABA system in postmortem studies, animal models, and human studies in schizophrenia. Converging evidence implicates alterations in both presynaptic and postsynaptic components of GABAergic neurotransmission in schizophrenia, and GABA may thus play an important role in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia. MRS studies can provide direct insight into the GABAergic mechanisms underlying the development of schizophrenia as well as changes during its course.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 286 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 286 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 52 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 47 16%
Researcher 32 11%
Student > Master 31 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 4%
Other 38 13%
Unknown 74 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 89 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 7%
Psychology 18 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 6%
Other 34 12%
Unknown 85 30%
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 02 March 2023.
All research outputs
#7,807,532
of 25,446,666 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#3,690
of 12,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,876
of 328,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychiatry
#39
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,446,666 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,716 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 328,350 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.