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 |
B-Type Natriuretic Peptide is Neither Itch-Specific Nor Functions Upstream of the GRP-GRPR Signaling Pathway
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Pain, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1744-8069-10-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xian-Yu Liu, Li Wan, Fu-Quan Huo, Devin M Barry, Hui Li, Zhong-Qiu Zhao, Zhou-Feng Chen |
| Abstract |
A recent study by Mishra and Hoon identified B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) as an important peptide for itch transmission and proposed that BNP activates spinal natriuretic peptide receptor-A (NPRA) expressing neurons, which release gastrin releasing peptide (GRP) to activate GRP receptor (GRPR) expressing neurons to relay itch information from the periphery to the brain (Science 340:968-971, 2013). A central premise for the validity of this novel pathway is the absence of GRP in the dorsal root ganglion (DRG) neurons. To this end, they showed that Grp mRNA in DRG neurons is either absent or barely detectable and claimed that BNP but not GRP is a major neurotransmitter for itch in pruriceptors. They showed that NPRA immunostaining is perfectly co-localized with Grp-eGFP in the spinal cord, and a few acute pain behaviors in Nppb-/- mice were tested. They claimed that BNP is an itch-selective peptide that acts as the first station of a dedicated neuronal pathway comprising a GRP-GRPR cascade for itch. However, our studies, along with the others, do not support their claims. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 26% |
| Researcher | 10 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 11% |
| Professor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 28% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 7 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,600,553
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Pain
#269
of 669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,362
of 319,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Pain
#20
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 319,280 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.