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 |
Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound prevents muscle atrophy induced by type 1 diabetes in rats
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Skeletal Muscle, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13395-017-0145-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Liang Tang, Nan Li, Wenqi Jian, Yiting Kang, Bo Yin, Shuxin Sun, Jianzhong Guo, Lijun Sun, Dean Ta |
| Abstract |
Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) induces serious skeletal muscle atrophy. Low-intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) is a common treatment for skeletal muscle injury and is effective in accelerating the rate of muscle growth. However, to the best of our knowledge, whether LIPUS can improve skeletal muscle atrophy in type 1 diabetic rats has not been investigated. The rats were randomly divided into four groups: the normal control group (NC); the sham-treated diabetic control group (DC); the diabetic, insulin-treated group (DI) as a positive control; and the diabetic LIPUS therapy group (DL). The DL rats were treated with LIPUS (1 MHz, 30 mW/cm2) on the gastrocnemius for 20 min/day. After 6 weeks, the rats in the DC group showed severe muscle atrophy. However, LIPUS significantly improved type 1 diabetes-induced muscle atrophy, as evidenced by significantly enhanced muscle cross-sectional area, muscle mass, and strength. Moreover, compared with the DC group, LIPUS significantly activated Akt and upregulated the expression of mTOR, and LIPUS downregulated the expression of MSTN, its receptor ActRIIB, and FoxO1. These results indicate that LIPUS improved muscle atrophy induced by type 1 diabetes, and the MSTN/Akt/mTOR&FoxO1 signaling pathway may play a role in this improvement. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 4 | 80% |
| Norway | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 12 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 14 | 45% |
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 28 December 2017.
All research outputs
#7,485,357
of 23,012,811 outputs
Outputs from Skeletal Muscle
#227
of 364 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,400
of 440,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Skeletal Muscle
#8
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,012,811 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 364 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 440,933 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.