| Title |
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension, hormones, and 11ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenases
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Pain Research, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jpr.s80824 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Keira A Markey, Maria Uldall, Hannah Botfield, Liam D Cato, Mohammed A L Miah, Ghaniah Hassan-Smith, Rigmor H Jensen, Ana M Gonzalez, Alexandra J Sinclair |
| Abstract |
Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) results in raised intracranial pressure (ICP) leading to papilledema, visual dysfunction, and headaches. Obese females of reproductive age are predominantly affected, but the underlying pathological mechanisms behind IIH remain unknown. This review provides an overview of pathogenic factors that could result in IIH with particular focus on hormones and the impact of obesity, including its role in neuroendocrine signaling and driving inflammation. Despite occurring almost exclusively in obese women, there have been a few studies evaluating the mechanisms by which hormones and adipokines exert their effects on ICP regulation in IIH. Research involving 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1, a modulator of glucocorticoids, suggests a potential role in IIH. Improved understanding of the complex interplay between adipose signaling factors such as adipokines, steroid hormones, and ICP regulation may be key to the understanding and future management of IIH. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 80 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 11% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 28 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 24% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 11% |
| Unknown | 34 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 21 May 2019.
All research outputs
#13,235,371
of 22,870,727 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#885
of 1,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,150
of 300,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#12
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,870,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 300,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.