↓ Skip to main content

Biochemical and immunological mechanisms by which sickle cell trait protects against malaria

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, September 2013
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 (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
251 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
Biochemical and immunological mechanisms by which sickle cell trait protects against malaria
Published in
Malaria Journal, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-12-317
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauren Gong, Sunil Parikh, Philip J Rosenthal, Bryan Greenhouse

Abstract

Sickle cell trait (HbAS) is the best-characterized genetic polymorphism known to protect against falciparum malaria. Although the protective effect of HbAS against malaria is well known, the mechanism(s) of protection remain unclear. A number of biochemical and immune-mediated mechanisms have been proposed, and it is likely that multiple complex mechanisms are responsible for the observed protection. Increased evidence for an immune component of protection as well as novel mechanisms, such as enhanced tolerance to disease mediated by HO-1 and reduced parasitic growth due to translocation of host micro-RNA into the parasite, have recently been described. A better understanding of relevant mechanisms will provide valuable insight into the host-parasite relationship, including the role of the host immune system in protection against malaria.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 251 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Burkina Faso 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 242 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 57 23%
Student > Master 45 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 14%
Student > Postgraduate 23 9%
Researcher 17 7%
Other 45 18%
Unknown 30 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 60 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 46 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 2%
Other 34 14%
Unknown 35 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 06 October 2021.
All research outputs
#2,643,710
of 21,861,505 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#609
of 5,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,918
of 179,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,861,505 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,394 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 179,600 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them