↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Mitochondrial therapy for Parkinson’s disease: Neuroprotective pharmaconutrition may be disease-modifying

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications, September 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 Mendeley
Title
Mitochondrial therapy for Parkinson’s disease: Neuroprotective pharmaconutrition may be disease-modifying
Published in
Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications, September 2010
DOI 10.2147/cpaa.s12082
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Kones

Abstract

Progressive destruction of neurons that produce dopamine in the basal ganglia of the brain, particularly the substantia nigra, is a hallmark of Parkinson's disease. The syndrome of the Parkinsonian phenotype is caused by many etiologies, involving multiple contributing mechanisms. Characteristic findings are pathologic inclusions called Lewy bodies, which are protein aggregates inside nerve cells. Environmental insults are linked with the disease, and a number of associated genes have also been identified. Neuroinflammation, microglia activation, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial dysfunction are central processes producing nerve damage. In addition, protein misfolding, driven by accumulation and condensation of α-synuclein, compounded by inadequate elimination of defective protein through the ubiquitin- proteasome system, promote apoptosis. Current pharmacologic therapy is palliative rather than disease- modifying, and typically becomes unsatisfactory over time. Coenzyme Q10 and creatine, two agents involved in energy production, may be disease-modifying, and able to produce sufficient beneficial pathophysiologic changes in preclinical studies to warrant large studies now in progress. Use of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids and vitamin D in PD are also topics of current interest.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 66 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 15%
Student > Master 8 12%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 20 29%
Unknown 12 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 12%
Neuroscience 5 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 17 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 May 2017.
All research outputs
#16,149,689
of 25,522,520 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications
#105
of 179 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,168
of 104,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology : Advances and Applications
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,522,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 179 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 104,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.