↓ Skip to main content

Comparative analysis of circulating dendritic cell subsets in patients with atopic diseases and sarcoidosis

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Comparative analysis of circulating dendritic cell subsets in patients with atopic diseases and sarcoidosis
Published in
Respiratory Research, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/1465-9921-14-29
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yumeko Hayashi, Yoshiki Ishii, Mitsumi Hata-Suzuki, Ryo Arai, Kazuyuki Chibana, Akihiro Takemasa, Takeshi Fukuda

Abstract

Dendritic cells (DCs) are professional antigen-presenting cells that play a crucial role in the initiation and modulation of immune responses. Human circulating blood DCs are divided into two major subsets: myeloid DCs (mDCs); and plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs). Furthermore, mDCs are subdivided into two subsets: Th1-promoting mDCs (mDC1s); and Th2-promoting mDCs (mDC2s). Although CD1a, CD1c, and CD141 are generally used for classifying mDC subsets, their adequacy as a specific marker remains unclear. We performed this study to compare circulating mDC, pDC, mDC1, and mDC2 subsets between Th1- and Th2-mediated diseases using CD1a and CD141, and to analyze the adequacy of CD1a and CD141 as a marker for mDC1s and mDC2s, respectively.

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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 51 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Master 9 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 10 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 March 2013.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#2,958
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,352
of 207,614 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#38
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 207,614 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.