↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Association between apolipoprotein E gene polymorphism and mild cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
Title
Association between apolipoprotein E gene polymorphism and mild cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2017
DOI 10.2147/cia.s143632
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yunxia Jiang, Tao He, Wenshuai Deng, Peng Sun

Abstract

A number of published case-control studies reported that the apolipoprotein E (ApoE) gene polymorphism was associated with the mild cognitive impairment (MCI). However, previous reports still remain conflicting. To estimate the association between ApoE polymorphism and MCI susceptibility, we searched the electronic databases including PubMed, Wanfang, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), VIP, and EMBASE to retrieve all available studies. A total of 18 studies with 2,004 cases and 3,705 controls were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled analysis based on selected studies showed that statistically significant risk association was found between ApoE gene polymorphism and MCI in overall population (ε4 vs ε3: odds ratio [OR] =2.38, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.11-2.68; ε4/ε4 vs ε3/ε3: OR =4.45, 95% CI: 3.06-6.48; ε2/ε4 vs ε3/ε3: OR =2.57, 95% CI: 1.77-3.73; ε3/ε4 vs ε3/ε3: OR =2.31, 95% CI: 1.99-2.69). However, no significant association was detected in two genetic models: ε2 versus ε3 (OR =0.90, 95% CI: 0.77-1.05) and ε2/ε2 versus ε3/ε3 (OR =0.91, 95% CI: 0.50-1.65). Furthermore, ApoE ε2/ε3 genotype provided a slight protection for MCI in overall population (ε2/ε3 vs ε3/ε3: OR =0.80, 95% CI: 0.66-0.97). In the stratified analysis based on ethnicity, similar results were also observed in Chinese population (significant risk: ε4 vs ε3: OR =2.52, 95% CI: 2.19-2.90; ε4/ε4 vs ε3/ε3: OR =5.45, 95% CI: 3.41-8.70; ε2/ε4 vs ε3/ε3: OR =2.59, 95% CI: 1.74-3.86; ε3/ε4 vs ε3/ε3: OR =2.34, 95% CI: 1.97-2.79; slight protection: ε2/ε3 vs ε3/ε3: OR =0.79, 95% CI: 0.64-0.98; no association: ε2 vs ε3: OR =0.92, 95% CI: 0.78-1.09; and ε2/ε2 vs ε3/ε3: OR =1.04, 95% CI: 0.55-1.99). In summary, this meta-analysis of 5,709 subjects suggested that ApoE ε4 allele was associated with an increased risk of MCI. In addition, ApoE ε2/ε3 genotype provided a slight protection for MCI.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Lecturer 2 8%
Student > Master 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 8 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 5 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 9 38%

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 14 November 2017.
All research outputs
#9,706,980
of 12,140,050 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#1,003
of 1,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,347
of 280,574 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#44
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,140,050 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 280,574 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.