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 |
Mast cells in meningiomas and brain inflammation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Neuroinflammation, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12974-015-0388-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stavros Polyzoidis, Triantafyllia Koletsa, Smaro Panagiotidou, Keyoumars Ashkan, Theoharis C. Theoharides |
| Abstract |
Research focus in neuro-oncology has shifted in the last decades towards the exploration of tumor infiltration by a variety of immune cells and their products. T cells, macrophages, B cells, and mast cells (MCs) have been identified. A systematic review of the literature was conducted by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) for the presence of MCs in meningiomas using the terms meningioma, inflammation and mast cells. MCs have been detected in various tumors of the central nervous system (CNS), such as gliomas, including glioblastoma multiforme, hemangioblastomas, and meningiomas as well as metastatic brain tumors. MCs were present in as many as 90 % of all high-grade meningiomas mainly found in the perivascular areas of the tumor. A correlation between peritumoral edema and MCs was found. Accumulation of MCs in meningiomas could contribute to the aggressiveness of tumors and to brain inflammation that may be involved in the pathogenesis of additional disorders. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 107 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 13% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 18% |
| Unknown | 27 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 27% |
| Neuroscience | 11 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 33 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 27 August 2022.
All research outputs
#2,746,310
of 23,189,371 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#420
of 2,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,480
of 273,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroinflammation
#5
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,189,371 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 273,204 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 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.