↓ Skip to main content

Pro-angiogenic therapeutics for preeclampsia

Overview of attention for article published in Biology of Sex Differences, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

2 tweeters


27 Dimensions

Readers on

84 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.
Pro-angiogenic therapeutics for preeclampsia
Published in
Biology of Sex Differences, August 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13293-018-0195-5
Pubmed ID

Adrian C. Eddy, Gene L. Bidwell, Eric M. George


Preeclampsia is a pregnancy-induced hypertensive disorder resulting from abnormal placentation, which causes factors such as sFlt-1 to be released into the maternal circulation. Though anti-hypertensive drugs and magnesium sulfate can be given in an effort to moderate symptoms, the syndrome is not well controlled. A hallmark characteristic of preeclampsia, especially early-onset preeclampsia, is angiogenic imbalance resulting from an inappropriately upregulated sFlt-1 acting as a decoy receptor binding vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and placental growth factor (PlGF), reducing their bioavailability. Administration of sFlt-1 leads to a preeclamptic phenotype, and several models of preeclampsia also have elevated levels of plasma sFlt-1, demonstrating its role in driving the progression of this disease. Treatment with either VEGF or PlGF has been effective in attenuating hypertension and proteinuria in multiple models of preeclampsia. VEGF, however, may have overdose toxicity risks that have not been observed in PlGF treatment, suggesting that PlGF is a potentially safer therapeutic option. This review discusses angiogenic balance as it relates to preeclampsia and the studies which have been performed in order to alleviate the imbalance driving the maternal syndrome.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 12%
Student > Master 9 11%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Postgraduate 8 10%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 26 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 29 35%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 August 2018.
All research outputs
of 13,429,000 outputs
Outputs from Biology of Sex Differences
of 245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 266,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology of Sex Differences
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,429,000 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 266,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.