↓ Skip to main content

Con: Alzheimer's disease and circadian dysfunction: chicken or egg?

Overview of attention for article published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Con: Alzheimer's disease and circadian dysfunction: chicken or egg?
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/alzrt129
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abhay Moghekar, Richard J O'Brien

Abstract

The development of late-onset Alzheimer's disease is believed to be influenced by genetic, socioeconomic, and lifestyle factors. Recently, converging research in animal and human studies has found that beta-amyloid (Aβ) levels in cerebrospinal fluid are modulated by sleep-wake cycles. This raises the possibility that chronic sleep loss causes brain amyloid accumulation over time and leads to the development of Alzheimer's disease. The observation that circadian rhythm modulates Aβ levels has not yet been replicated by other groups, and subject selection and methodologies are potential explanations for this. While acute suppression of sleep may raise Aβ levels, it is not known whether chronic sleep loss has the same effect. It is conceivable that altered circadian rhythms are a manifestation of a disrupted sleep network because of preclinical disease, as has been observed in other neurodegenerative disorders. The findings that circadian variation in Aβ levels in cerebrospinal fluid is a direct result of sleep-wake cycles and that altering normal rhythms increases the risk for brain amyloid accumulation need to be replicated in larger cohorts. Prospective studies are needed to decipher whether circadian rhythm dysfunction is a cause, or a result of, amyloid accumulation.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 26%
Other 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 2 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 22%
Neuroscience 3 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 2 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 13 August 2012.
All research outputs
#2,191,669
of 12,561,272 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#349
of 539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,854
of 161,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,561,272 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 539 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.0. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 161,085 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.