The need for a worldwide consensus for cell line authentication: Experience implementing a mandatory requirement at the International Journal of Cancer
Cell lines are used in life science research worldwide as biological surrogates. All cell lines are subject to major limitations when used as research tools, including (i) cross-contamination with other cells cultured in the same laboratory environment and (ii) evolution in vitro that renders a given cell line inappropriate as a surrogate for a specific biological hypothesis. There is ample evidence that cross-contamination or phenotypic drift of cells in culture can generate irreproducible or misleading data. A small number of scientific journals-the International Journal of Cancer being at the forefront-and funding agencies have recently moved forward to ask for obligatory cell line authentication data. The history of implementing such rules by the International Journal of Cancer exemplifies the difficulties encountered when installing mandatory quality measures in life sciences.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 30 July 2024.
All research outputs
#1,103,996
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Biology
#1,724
of 7,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,769
of 354,338 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Biology
#31
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 354,338 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
