↓ Skip to main content

Pathogenesis of chronic viral hepatitis: differential roles of T cells and NK cells

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Medicine, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
396 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
354 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Pathogenesis of chronic viral hepatitis: differential roles of T cells and NK cells
Published in
Nature Medicine, July 2013
DOI 10.1038/nm.3251
Pubmed ID
Authors

Barbara Rehermann

Abstract

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections account for 57% of cases of liver cirrhosis and 78% of cases of primary liver cancer worldwide and cause a million deaths per year. Although HBV and HCV differ in their genome structures, replication strategies and life cycles, they have common features, including their noncytopathic nature and their capacity to induce chronic liver disease, which is thought to be immune mediated. However, the rate of disease progression from chronic hepatitis to cirrhosis varies greatly among infected individuals, and the factors that regulate it are largely unknown. This review summarizes our current understanding of the roles of antigen-specific and nonspecific immune cells in the pathogenesis of chronic hepatitis B and C and discusses recent findings that identify natural killer cells as regulators of T cell function and liver inflammation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 354 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
Germany 3 <1%
Netherlands 3 <1%
Egypt 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 340 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 60 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 55 16%
Student > Bachelor 43 12%
Student > Master 37 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 8%
Other 67 19%
Unknown 62 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 95 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 73 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 51 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 29 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 3%
Other 30 8%
Unknown 67 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 24 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,087,640
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Nature Medicine
#4,916
of 8,464 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,966
of 194,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Medicine
#63
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,464 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 96.7. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 194,174 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.