| Title |
Methylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase (MTHFR) C677T Polymorphism and Alzheimer Disease Risk: a Meta-Analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Neurobiology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12035-016-9722-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vandana Rai |
| Abstract |
Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) is key enzyme of folate/homocysteine pathway. Case control association studies on MTHFR C677T polymorphism and Alzheimer's disease (AD) have been repeatedly performed over the last two decades, but the results are inconclusive. The aim of the present study was to assess the risk of MTHFR C677T polymorphism for AD. Forty-one studies were identified by a search of PubMed, Google Scholar, Elsevier, and Springer Link databases, up to January 2015. Odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95 % confidence interval (CI) were calculated using fixed effect model or random effect model. The subgroup analyses based on ethnicity were performed. MTHFR C677T polymorphism had a significant association with susceptibility to AD in all genetic models (for T vs C OR = 1.29, 95 % CI = 1.07-1.56, p = 0.003; for TT + CT vs CC OR = 1.29, 95 % CI = 1.19-1.40, p = 0.0004; for TT vs CC OR = 1.31, 95 % CI = 1.16-1.48, p = 0.001; for CT vs CC OR = 1.24, 95 % CI = 1.13-1.35, p < 0.004; and for TT vs CT + CC OR = 1.13, 95 % CI = 1.00-1.28, p = 0.02). Results of present meta-analysis supported that the MTHFR C677T polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of AD. |
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 States | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 74 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 15 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 20 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 31 December 2019.
All research outputs
#1,213,606
of 22,842,950 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Neurobiology
#86
of 3,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,676
of 396,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Neurobiology
#1
of 183 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,842,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,460 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 396,721 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 183 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.