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 |
Reprogramming non-human primate somatic cells into functional neuronal cells by defined factors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Brain, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1756-6606-7-24 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhi Zhou, Kazuhisa Kohda, Keiji Ibata, Jun Kohyama, Wado Akamatsu, Michisuke Yuzaki, Hirotaka James Okano, Erika Sasaki, Hideyuki Okano |
| Abstract |
The common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus) is a New World primate sharing many similarities with humans. Recently developed technology for generating transgenic marmosets has opened new avenues for faithful recapitulation of human diseases, which could not be achieved in rodent models. However, the longer lifespan of common marmosets compared with rodents may result in an extended period for in vivo analysis of common marmoset disease models. Therefore, establishing rapid and efficient techniques for obtaining neuronal cells from transgenic individuals that enable in vitro analysis of molecular mechanisms underlying diseases are required. Recently, several groups have reported on methods, termed direct reprogramming, to generate neuronal cells by defined factors from somatic cells of various kinds of species, including mouse and human. The aim of the present study was to determine whether direct reprogramming technology was applicable to common marmosets. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 12% |
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 30 September 2014.
All research outputs
#18,655,919
of 23,937,668 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Brain
#776
of 1,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,816
of 228,667 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Brain
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,937,668 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,155 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 228,667 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.