↓ Skip to main content

Role of Capsaicin-Sensitive C-Fiber Afferents in Neuropathic Pain-Induced Synaptic Potentiation in the Nociceptive Amygdala

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Pain, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Role of Capsaicin-Sensitive C-Fiber Afferents in Neuropathic Pain-Induced Synaptic Potentiation in the Nociceptive Amygdala
Published in
Molecular Pain, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1744-8069-8-51
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ayano Nakao, Yukari Takahashi, Masashi Nagase, Ryo Ikeda, Fusao Kato

Abstract

Neurons in the capsular part of the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeC), a region also called "nociceptive amygdala," receive nociceptive information from the dorsal horn via afferent pathways relayed from the lateral parabrachial nucleus (LPB). As the central amygdala is known to be involved in the acquisition and expression of emotion, this pathway is thought to play central roles in the generation of affective responses to nociceptive inputs. Excitatory synaptic transmission between afferents arising from the LPB and these CeC neurons is potentiated in arthritic, visceral, neuropathic, inflammatory and muscle pain models. In neuropathic pain models following spinal nerve ligation (SNL), in which we previously showed a robust LPB-CeC potentiation, the principal behavioral symptom is tactile allodynia triggered by non-C-fiber low-threshold mechanoreceptor afferents. Conversely, recent anatomical studies have revealed that most of the spinal neurons projecting to the LPB receive C-fiber afferent inputs. Here, we examined the hypothesis that these C-fiber-mediated inputs are necessary for the full establishment of robust synaptic potentiation of LPB-CeC transmission in the rats with neuropathic pain.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 82 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 31%
Researcher 13 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 8%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 10 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 29 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 14%
Psychology 5 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 10 12%

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 September 2013.
All research outputs
#10,042,452
of 12,552,259 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Pain
#333
of 464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#107,320
of 156,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Pain
#12
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,552,259 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 464 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 156,853 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 12 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.