↓ Skip to main content

Brain vascular heterogeneity: implications for disease pathogenesis and design of in vitro blood–brain barrier models

Overview of attention for article published in Fluids and Barriers of the CNS, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Brain vascular heterogeneity: implications for disease pathogenesis and design of in vitro blood–brain barrier models
Published in
Fluids and Barriers of the CNS, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12987-018-0097-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Midrelle E. Noumbissi, Bianca Galasso, Monique F. Stins

Abstract

The vertebrate blood-brain barrier (BBB) is composed of cerebral microvascular endothelial cells (CEC). The BBB acts as a semi-permeable cellular interface that tightly regulates bidirectional molecular transport between blood and the brain parenchyma in order to maintain cerebral homeostasis. The CEC phenotype is regulated by a variety of factors, including cells in its immediate environment and within functional neurovascular units. The cellular composition of the brain parenchyma surrounding the CEC varies between different brain regions; this difference is clearly visible in grey versus white matter. In this review, we discuss evidence for the existence of brain vascular heterogeneity, focusing on differences between the vessels of the grey and white matter. The region-specific differences in the vasculature of the brain are reflective of specific functions of those particular brain areas. This BBB-endothelial heterogeneity may have implications for the course of pathogenesis of cerebrovascular diseases and neurological disorders involving vascular activation and dysfunction. This heterogeneity should be taken into account when developing BBB-neuro-disease models representative of specific brain areas.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 22%
Student > Master 16 15%
Researcher 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 23 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 15%
Neuroscience 17 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Engineering 6 5%
Other 23 21%
Unknown 29 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 September 2018.
All research outputs
#7,554,540
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Fluids and Barriers of the CNS
#137
of 370 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,995
of 326,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Fluids and Barriers of the CNS
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 370 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. 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 326,560 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.