↓ Skip to main content

Lung fibroblasts from patients with emphysema show markers of senescence in vitro

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, February 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
146 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Lung fibroblasts from patients with emphysema show markers of senescence in vitro
Published in
Respiratory Research, February 2006
DOI 10.1186/1465-9921-7-32
Pubmed ID
Authors

K-C Müller, L Welker, K Paasch, B Feindt, VJ Erpenbeck, JM Hohlfeld, N Krug, M Nakashima, D Branscheid, H Magnussen, RA Jörres, O Holz

Abstract

The loss of alveolar walls is a hallmark of emphysema. As fibroblasts play an important role in the maintenance of alveolar structure, a change in fibroblast phenotype could be involved in the pathogenesis of this disease. In a previous study we found a reduced in vitro proliferation rate and number of population doublings of parenchymal lung fibroblasts from patients with emphysema and we hypothesized that these findings could be related to a premature cellular aging of these cells. In this study, we therefore compared cellular senescence markers and expression of respective genes between lung fibroblasts from patients with emphysema and control patients without COPD.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 90 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 16%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 11%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 14 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 18 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 September 2022.
All research outputs
#4,836,164
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#606
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,999
of 92,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#7
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,062 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 92,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.