↓ Skip to main content

Loss of non-coding RNA expression from the DLK1-DIO3 imprinted locus correlates with reduced neural differentiation potential in human embryonic stem cell lines

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
137 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Loss of non-coding RNA expression from the DLK1-DIO3 imprinted locus correlates with reduced neural differentiation potential in human embryonic stem cell lines
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/scrt535
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chu-Fan Mo, Fang-Chun Wu, Kang-Yu Tai, Wei-Chun Chang, Kai-Wei Chang, Hung-Chih Kuo, Hong-Nerng Ho, Hsin-Fu Chen, Shau-Ping Lin

Abstract

Pluripotent stem cells are increasingly used to build therapeutic models, including the transplantation of neural progenitors derived from human embryonic stem cells (hESCs). Recently, long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), including delta-like homolog 1 gene and the type III iodothyronine deiodinase gene (DLK1-DIO3) imprinted locus-derived Maternally Expressed Gene 3 (MEG3), were found to be expressed during neural development. The deregulation of these lncRNAs is associated with various neurological diseases. The imprinted locus DLK1-DIO3 encodes abundant non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) that are regulated by differential methylation of the locus. We aim to study the correlation between the DLK1-DIO3-derived ncRNAs and the capacity of hESCs to differentiate into neural lineages.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 26%
Researcher 15 23%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Other 5 8%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 6 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 7 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 January 2015.
All research outputs
#8,402,160
of 14,798,224 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#580
of 1,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,948
of 298,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#15
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,798,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,355 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 298,177 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 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.