↓ Skip to main content

Post-mortem analysis of neuroinflammatory changes in human Alzheimer’s disease

Overview of attention for article published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
183 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
Post-mortem analysis of neuroinflammatory changes in human Alzheimer’s disease
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13195-015-0126-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Diego Gomez-Nicola, Delphine Boche

Abstract

Since the genome-wide association studies in Alzheimer's disease have highlighted inflammation as a driver of the disease rather than a consequence of the ongoing neurodegeneration, numerous studies have been performed to identify specific immune profiles associated with healthy, ageing, or diseased brain. However, these studies have been performed mainly in in vitro or animal models, which recapitulate only some aspects of the pathophysiology of human Alzheimer's disease. In this review, we discuss the availability of human post-mortem tissue through brain banks, the limitations associated with its use, the technical tools available, and the neuroimmune aspects to explore in order to validate in the human brain the experimental observations arising from animal models.

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 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 179 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 19%
Student > Bachelor 32 17%
Researcher 27 15%
Student > Master 27 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 42 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 36 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 10%
Chemistry 5 3%
Other 20 11%
Unknown 49 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 05 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,371,499
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#533
of 1,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,401
of 265,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#13
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 265,536 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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 50% of its contemporaries.