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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Physiological β-catenin signaling controls self-renewal networks and generation of stem-like cells from nasopharyngeal carcinoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2121-14-44 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yue Cheng, Arthur Kwok Leung Cheung, Josephine Mun Yee Ko, Yee Peng Phoon, Pui Man Chiu, Paulisally Hau Yi Lo, Marian L Waterman, Maria Li Lung |
| Abstract |
A few reports suggested that low levels of Wnt signaling might drive cell reprogramming, but these studies could not establish a clear relationship between Wnt signaling and self-renewal networks. There are ongoing debates as to whether and how the Wnt/β-catenin signaling is involved in the control of pluripotency gene networks. Additionally, whether physiological β-catenin signaling generates stem-like cells through interactions with other pathways is as yet unclear. The nasopharyngeal carcinoma HONE1 cells have low expression of β-catenin and wild-type expression of p53, which provided a possibility to study regulatory mechanism of stemness networks induced by physiological levels of Wnt signaling in these cells. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 30% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 7 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 24% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 17% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 9 | 17% |
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 04 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#935
of 1,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,438
of 216,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 216,586 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.