↓ Skip to main content

Estrogen aggravates inflammation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia in cystic fibrosis mice

Overview of attention for article published in Respiratory Research, November 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Estrogen aggravates inflammation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia in cystic fibrosis mice
Published in
Respiratory Research, November 2010
DOI 10.1186/1465-9921-11-166
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yufa Wang, Elvis Cela, Stéphane Gagnon, Neil B Sweezey

Abstract

Among patients with cystic fibrosis (CF), females have worse pulmonary function and survival than males, primarily due to chronic lung inflammation and infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa). A role for gender hormones in the causation of the CF "gender gap" has been proposed. The female gender hormone 17β-estradiol (E2) plays a complex immunomodulatory role in humans and in animal models of disease, suppressing inflammation in some situations while enhancing it in others. Helper T-cells were long thought to belong exclusively to either T helper type 1 (Th1) or type 2 (Th2) lineages. However, a distinct lineage named Th17 is now recognized that is induced by interleukin (IL)-23 to produce IL-17 and other pro-inflammatory Th17 effector molecules. Recent evidence suggests a central role for the IL-23/IL-17 pathway in the pathogenesis of CF lung inflammation. We used a mouse model to test the hypothesis that E2 aggravates the CF lung inflammation that occurs in response to airway infection with P. aeruginosa by a Th17-mediated mechanism.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Ireland 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 69 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 14 19%
Unknown 16 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 20 28%
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 December 2013.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Respiratory Research
#2,216
of 3,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,198
of 190,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Respiratory Research
#13
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 190,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.