↓ Skip to main content

The elusive role of B lymphocytes and islet autoantibodies in (human) type 1 diabetes

Overview of attention for article published in Diabetologia, April 2017
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 Mendeley
Title
The elusive role of B lymphocytes and islet autoantibodies in (human) type 1 diabetes
Published in
Diabetologia, April 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00125-017-4284-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stef J. Bloem, Bart O. Roep

Abstract

The role of B lymphocytes in the pathogenesis of type 1 diabetes in humans is not entirely evident. These cells are presumed to be important, but this assumption is largely based on animal models of autoimmune diabetes, where compelling evidence for the contribution of both B lymphocytes and insulin-specific autoantibodies to this disease is in place. For humans, this is much less the case; the exact way in which B lymphocytes and/or autoantibodies may contribute to type 1 diabetes is not yet known but the possibilities include a pathogenic function ('fire'), or they may represent a surrogate of loss of immune tolerance to beta cells ('smoke') or, indeed, they could be a marker of an attempt at immune regulation ('ice water'). In this issue of Diabetologia, a study by Willcox et al (DOI: 10.1007/s00125-017-4221-7 ) adds new information but no greater clarity on the relevance of B lymphocytes in type 1 diabetes, showing a decrease in germinal centre frequencies in donors with recent-onset type 1 diabetes compared with control donors and donors with longstanding type 1 diabetes. These new findings may guide the research community to design experiments to unambiguously define whether B lymphocytes or their products function as fire, smoke or perhaps ice water in the immunopathogenesis of type 1 diabetes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 16 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 19 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 06 February 2024.
All research outputs
#3,132,394
of 25,008,338 outputs
Outputs from Diabetologia
#1,515
of 5,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,048
of 315,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Diabetologia
#46
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,008,338 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 315,275 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.