↓ Skip to main content

Development and validation of a new high-throughput method to investigate the clonality of HTLV-1-infected cells based on provirus integration sites

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Medicine, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (60th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Development and validation of a new high-throughput method to investigate the clonality of HTLV-1-infected cells based on provirus integration sites
Published in
Genome Medicine, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/gm568
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sanaz Firouzi, Yosvany López, Yutaka Suzuki, Kenta Nakai, Sumio Sugano, Tadanori Yamochi, Toshiki Watanabe

Abstract

Transformation and clonal proliferation of T-cells infected with human T-cell leukemia virus type-I (HTLV-1) cause adult T-cell leukemia. We took advantage of next-generation sequencing technology to develop and internally validate a new methodology for isolating integration sites and estimating the number of cells in each HTLV-1-infected clone (clone size). Initial analysis was performed with DNA samples from infected individuals. We then used appropriate controls with known integration sites and clonality status to confirm the accuracy of our system, which indeed had the least errors among the currently available techniques. Results suggest potential clinical and biological applications of the new method.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 3%
Brazil 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Unknown 52 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 28%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 2 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 16%
Engineering 3 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 3 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 November 2019.
All research outputs
#8,477,700
of 16,133,257 outputs
Outputs from Genome Medicine
#885
of 1,086 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,041
of 190,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Medicine
#13
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,133,257 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,086 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.7. 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 190,672 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.