↓ Skip to main content

The association between Alu hypomethylation and severity of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epigenetics, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
The association between Alu hypomethylation and severity of type 2 diabetes mellitus
Published in
Clinical Epigenetics, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13148-017-0395-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jirapan Thongsroy, Maturada Patchsung, Apiwat Mutirangura

Abstract

Cellular senescence due to genomic instability is believed to be one of the mechanisms causing health problems in diabetes mellitus (DM). Low methylation levels of Alu elements or Alu hypomethylation, an epigenomic event causing genomic instability, were commonly found in aging people and patients with aging phenotypes, such as osteoporosis. We investigate Alu methylation levels of white blood cells of type 2 DM, pre-DM, and control. The DM group possess the lowest Alu methylation (P < 0.001, P < 0.0001 adjusted age). In the DM group, Alu hypomethylation is directly correlated with high fasting blood sugar, HbA1C, and blood pressure. Genome-wide hypomethylation may be one of the underlining mechanisms causing genomic instability in type 2 DM. Moreover, Alu methylation levels may be a useful biomarker for monitoring cellular senescence in type 2 DM patients.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 21%
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Postgraduate 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 10 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Materials Science 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 11 26%
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 December 2021.
All research outputs
#7,291,566
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epigenetics
#527
of 1,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,682
of 316,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epigenetics
#8
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,262 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 316,373 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.