| Title |
Animal models of myasthenia gravis: utility and limitations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of General Medicine, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijgm.s88552 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Renato Mantegazza, Chiara Cordiglieri, Alessandra Consonni, Fulvio Baggi |
| Abstract |
Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a chronic autoimmune disease caused by the immune attack of the neuromuscular junction. Antibodies directed against the acetylcholine receptor (AChR) induce receptor degradation, complement cascade activation, and postsynaptic membrane destruction, resulting in functional reduction in AChR availability. Besides anti-AChR antibodies, other autoantibodies are known to play pathogenic roles in MG. The experimental autoimmune MG (EAMG) models have been of great help over the years in understanding the pathophysiological role of specific autoantibodies and T helper lymphocytes and in suggesting new therapies for prevention and modulation of the ongoing disease. EAMG can be induced in mice and rats of susceptible strains that show clinical symptoms mimicking the human disease. EAMG models are helpful for studying both the muscle and the immune compartments to evaluate new treatment perspectives. In this review, we concentrate on recent findings on EAMG models, focusing on their utility and limitations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Argentina | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 95 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Professor | 5 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 18% |
| Unknown | 29 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 13% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 10 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 31% |
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 17 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,738,224
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#571
of 1,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,461
of 312,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 312,592 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.