↓ Skip to main content

How regulatory T cells work

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Reviews Immunology, July 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
11 X users
patent
44 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
2541 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
2866 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
connotea
4 Connotea
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
How regulatory T cells work
Published in
Nature Reviews Immunology, July 2008
DOI 10.1038/nri2343
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dario A. A. Vignali, Lauren W. Collison, Creg J. Workman

Abstract

Regulatory T (T(Reg)) cells are essential for maintaining peripheral tolerance, preventing autoimmune diseases and limiting chronic inflammatory diseases. However, they also limit beneficial responses by suppressing sterilizing immunity and limiting antitumour immunity. Given that T(Reg) cells can have both beneficial and deleterious effects, there is considerable interest in determining their mechanisms of action. In this Review, we describe the basic mechanisms used by T(Reg) cells to mediate suppression and discuss whether one or many of these mechanisms are likely to be crucial for T(Reg)-cell function. In addition, we propose the hypothesis that effector T cells may not be 'innocent' parties in this suppressive process and might in fact potentiate T(Reg)-cell function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 2,866 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 25 <1%
United Kingdom 12 <1%
Brazil 11 <1%
Germany 8 <1%
Japan 5 <1%
Netherlands 5 <1%
France 4 <1%
Belgium 4 <1%
Mexico 4 <1%
Other 39 1%
Unknown 2749 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 609 21%
Researcher 422 15%
Student > Bachelor 369 13%
Student > Master 368 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 171 6%
Other 380 13%
Unknown 547 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 777 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 469 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 420 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 355 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 55 2%
Other 205 7%
Unknown 585 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 112. 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 02 February 2024.
All research outputs
#360,959
of 24,811,594 outputs
Outputs from Nature Reviews Immunology
#180
of 2,626 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#600
of 91,100 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Reviews Immunology
#1
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,811,594 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,626 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 42.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 91,100 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.