↓ Skip to main content

Identification of common genetic modifiers of neurodegenerative diseases from an integrative analysis of diverse genetic screens in model organisms

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, February 2012
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Identification of common genetic modifiers of neurodegenerative diseases from an integrative analysis of diverse genetic screens in model organisms
Published in
BMC Genomics, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2164-13-71
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xi Chen, Robert D Burgoyne

Abstract

An array of experimental models have been developed in the small model organisms C. elegans, S. cerevisiae and D. melanogaster for the study of various neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and expanded polyglutamine diseases as exemplified by Huntington's disease (HD) and related ataxias. Genetic approaches to determine the nature of regulators of the disease phenotypes have ranged from small scale to essentially whole genome screens. The published data covers distinct models in all three organisms and one important question is the extent to which shared genetic factors can be uncovered that affect several or all disease models. Surprisingly it has appeared that there may be relatively little overlap and that many of the regulators may be organism or disease-specific. There is, however, a need for a fully integrated analysis of the available genetic data based on careful comparison of orthologues across the species to determine the real extent of overlap.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
India 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Jordan 1 <1%
Unknown 96 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 24%
Researcher 23 22%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 13 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 12%
Neuroscience 10 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 13 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 19 April 2012.
All research outputs
#4,081,490
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#1,426
of 11,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,635
of 258,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#15
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,244 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 258,301 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.