↓ Skip to main content

White adipose tissue reference network: a knowledge resource for exploring health-relevant relations

Overview of attention for article published in Genes & Nutrition, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
White adipose tissue reference network: a knowledge resource for exploring health-relevant relations
Published in
Genes & Nutrition, December 2014
DOI 10.1007/s12263-014-0439-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Kelder, Georg Summer, Martien Caspers, Evert M. van Schothorst, Jaap Keijer, Loes Duivenvoorde, Susanne Klaus, Anja Voigt, Laura Bohnert, Catalina Pico, Andreu Palou, M. Luisa Bonet, Aldona Dembinska-Kiec, Malgorzata Malczewska-Malec, Beata Kieć-Wilk, Josep M. del Bas, Antoni Caimari, Lluis Arola, Marjan van Erk, Ben van Ommen, Marijana Radonjic

Abstract

Optimal health is maintained by interaction of multiple intrinsic and environmental factors at different levels of complexity-from molecular, to physiological, to social. Understanding and quantification of these interactions will aid design of successful health interventions. We introduce the reference network concept as a platform for multi-level exploration of biological relations relevant for metabolic health, by integration and mining of biological interactions derived from public resources and context-specific experimental data. A White Adipose Tissue Health Reference Network (WATRefNet) was constructed as a resource for discovery and prioritization of mechanism-based biomarkers for white adipose tissue (WAT) health status and the effect of food and drug compounds on WAT health status. The WATRefNet (6,797 nodes and 32,171 edges) is based on (1) experimental data obtained from 10 studies addressing different adiposity states, (2) seven public knowledge bases of molecular interactions, (3) expert's definitions of five physiologically relevant processes key to WAT health, namely WAT expandability, Oxidative capacity, Metabolic state, Oxidative stress and Tissue inflammation, and (4) a collection of relevant biomarkers of these processes identified by BIOCLAIMS ( http://bioclaims.uib.es ). The WATRefNet comprehends multiple layers of biological complexity as it contains various types of nodes and edges that represent different biological levels and interactions. We have validated the reference network by showing overrepresentation with anti-obesity drug targets, pathology-associated genes and differentially expressed genes from an external disease model dataset. The resulting network has been used to extract subnetworks specific to the above-mentioned expert-defined physiological processes. Each of these process-specific signatures represents a mechanistically supported composite biomarker for assessing and quantifying the effect of interventions on a physiological aspect that determines WAT health status. Following this principle, five anti-diabetic drug interventions and one diet intervention were scored for the match of their expression signature to the five biomarker signatures derived from the WATRefNet. This confirmed previous observations of successful intervention by dietary lifestyle and revealed WAT-specific effects of drug interventions. The WATRefNet represents a sustainable knowledge resource for extraction of relevant relationships such as mechanisms of action, nutrient intervention targets and biomarkers and for assessment of health effects for support of health claims made on food products.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 70 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 18%
Professor 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Master 6 8%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 8 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Computer Science 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 10 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 23 January 2015.
All research outputs
#6,119,347
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Genes & Nutrition
#118
of 397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,827
of 364,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genes & Nutrition
#4
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 364,887 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 69% of its contemporaries.