↓ Skip to main content

Thymic Involution in Aging

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Immunology, July 2000
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 (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
260 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Thymic Involution in Aging
Published in
Journal of Clinical Immunology, July 2000
DOI 10.1023/a:1006611518223
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard Aspinall, Deborah Andrew

Abstract

The size of the naive T-cell pool is governed by output from the thymus and not by replication. This pool contributes cells to the activated/memory T-cell pool whose size can be increased through cell multiplication; both pools together constitute the peripheral T-cell pool. Aging is associated with involution of the thymus leading to a reduction in its contribution to the naive T-cell pool; however, despite this diminished thymic output, there is no significant decline in the total number of T cells in the peripheral T-cell pool. There are, however, considerable shifts in the ratios of both pools of cells, with an increase in the number of activated/memory T cells and the accumulation in older individuals of cells that fail to respond to stimuli as efficiently as T cells from younger individuals. Aging is also associated with a greater susceptibility to some infections and some cancers. An understanding of the causal mechanism of thymic involution could lead to the design of a rational therapy to reverse the loss of thymic tissue, renew thymic function, increase thymic output, and potentially improve immune function in aged individuals.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 108 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 20%
Student > Master 17 15%
Researcher 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 17 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 16%
Immunology and Microbiology 15 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 18 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 01 January 2024.
All research outputs
#5,240,498
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#355
of 1,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,204
of 39,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Immunology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,809 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 39,276 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them