↓ Skip to main content

Distinct contextual roles for Notch signalling in skeletal muscle stem cells

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Developmental Biology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 359)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
104 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
167 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
Distinct contextual roles for Notch signalling in skeletal muscle stem cells
Published in
BMC Developmental Biology, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-213x-14-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Philippos Mourikis, Shahragim Tajbakhsh

Abstract

Notch signalling acts in virtually every tissue during the lifetime of metazoans. Recent studies have pointed to multiple roles for Notch in stem cells during quiescence, proliferation, temporal specification, and maintenance of the niche architecture. Skeletal muscle has served as an excellent paradigm to examine these diverse roles as embryonic, foetal, and adult skeletal muscle stem cells have different molecular signatures and functional properties, reflecting their developmental specification during ontology. Notably, Notch signalling has emerged as a major regulator of all muscle stem cells. This review will provide an overview of Notch signalling during myogenic development and postnatally, and underscore the seemingly opposing contextual activities of Notch that have lead to a reassessment of its role in myogenesis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 161 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 23%
Researcher 37 22%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 7%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 25 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 55 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Engineering 2 1%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 30 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 31 December 2014.
All research outputs
#3,822,456
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Developmental Biology
#46
of 359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,996
of 311,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Developmental Biology
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. 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 311,910 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.