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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Compounds that correct F508del-CFTR trafficking can also correct other protein trafficking diseases: an in vitro study using cell lines
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1750-1172-8-11 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heidi M Sampson, Hung Lam, Pei-Chun Chen, Donglei Zhang, Cristina Mottillo, Myriam Mirza, Karim Qasim, Alvin Shrier, Show-Ling Shyng, John W Hanrahan, David Y Thomas |
| Abstract |
Many genetic diseases are due to defects in protein trafficking where the mutant protein is recognized by the quality control systems, retained in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), and degraded by the proteasome. In many cases, the mutant protein retains function if it can be trafficked to its proper cellular location. We have identified structurally diverse correctors that restore the trafficking and function of the most common mutation causing cystic fibrosis, F508del-CFTR. Most of these correctors do not act directly as ligands of CFTR, but indirectly on other pathways to promote folding and correction. We hypothesize that these proteostasis regulators may also correct other protein trafficking diseases. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 50 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 24% |
| Researcher | 10 | 19% |
| Professor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 43% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
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 17 January 2013.
All research outputs
#18,326,065
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#2,123
of 2,598 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,626
of 283,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
#84
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 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 2,598 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 283,921 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.