| Title |
The role of glial cells and the complement system in retinal diseases and Alzheimer’s disease: common neural degeneration mechanisms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-014-4078-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hannah Harvey, Szonya Durant |
| Abstract |
Many age-related degenerative diseases of the central nervous system (CNS) increasingly appear to have similarities in their underlying causes. By applying knowledge between disorders, and in particular between degenerative diseases of different components of the CNS (e.g. the eye and the brain), we can begin to elucidate general mechanisms of neural degeneration. Age-related macular degeneration and glaucoma, two diseases of retinal neurons, which have recently been discussed in view of their common mechanisms with Alzheimer's disease, highlight this perspective. This review discusses the common roles of the complement system (an immunological system) and glial cells (providing, amongst other functions, trophic support to neurons) in these three disorders. A number of facets of these systems would seem to be involved in the mechanisms of degeneration in at least two of the three diseases considered here. Regulatory proteins of the complement system (such as factor H), neurotrophin levels, and the interaction of microglia with the complement system in particular may be general to all three presentations of neural degeneration. Investigating the functioning of these fundamental systems across different diseases exemplifies the importance of considering advances in knowledge across a wider base than specific disease pathology. This may give insights both for understanding the function of these supporting systems and providing an avenue for developing future therapeutic targets general to neural degenerative diseases. |
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 | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 30% |
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 21% |
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 25 June 2015.
All research outputs
#13,213,841
of 23,798,792 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#1,460
of 3,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,250
of 239,365 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#10
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,798,792 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 239,365 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.