Cited by 558Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration MechanismsNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology ResearchAlzheimer's disease research and treatments

New insights on the role of microglia in synaptic pruning in health and disease

Open access
Hong, Soyon, Dissing-Olesen, Lasse, Stevens, Beth·2016·Current Opinion in Neurobiology

Abstract

Recent genome-wide association studies implicate microglia in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathogenesis; however, their biological significance remains poorly understood. Synapse loss is a significant correlate of cognitive decline that serves as a critical hallmark of AD and other neurodegenerative diseases; however, mechanisms underlying synaptic vulnerability remain elusive. Emerging research on microglia function in the healthy brain is providing new insight into fundamental roles of microglia and immune molecules in brain wiring. Among their many roles, microglia prune developing synapses and regulate synaptic plasticity and function. Here, we review and discuss how this emerging work may provide new insight into how disruptions in microglia-synapse interactions could contribute to synapse loss and dysfunction, and consequently cognitive impairment, in AD.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.conb.2015.12.004

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 79 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hong, S., Dissing-Olesen, L., & Stevens, B.
Affiliations
Boston Children's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Stevens, Beth
Venue
Current Opinion in Neurobiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-02
Volume
36
Pages
128-134
ISSN
0959-4388 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2225188179
Cited by
557
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 59 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 73 · 2020: 57 · 2019: 41 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 58 · 2016: 22
FWCI
3.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Opinion in Neurobiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Lundbeck Foundation
  • Alzheimer's Research Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
Keywords
microglia, synaptic pruning, Alzheimer's disease, synaptic loss, synaptic plasticity, cognitive impairment, neurodegeneration, brain development, neuroinflammation
MeSH terms
Alzheimer Disease, Animals, Brain, Disease Models, Animal, Humans, Neuronal Plasticity, Microglia, Genome-Wide Association Study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review