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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparable Frequencies of Coding Mutations and Loss of Imprinting in Human Pluripotent Cells Derived by Nuclear Transfer and Defined Factors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell Stem Cell, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.stem.2014.10.002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bjarki Johannesson, Ido Sagi, Athurva Gore, Daniel Paull, Mitsutoshi Yamada, Tamar Golan-Lev, Zhe Li, Charles LeDuc, Yufeng Shen, Samantha Stern, Nanfang Xu, Hong Ma, Eunju Kang, Shoukhrat Mitalipov, Mark V. Sauer, Kun Zhang, Nissim Benvenisty, Dieter Egli |
| Abstract |
The recent finding that reprogrammed human pluripotent stem cells can be derived by nuclear transfer into human oocytes as well as by induced expression of defined factors has revitalized the debate on whether one approach might be advantageous over the other. Here we compare the genetic and epigenetic integrity of human nuclear-transfer embryonic stem cell (NT-ESC) lines and isogenic induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) lines, derived from the same somatic cell cultures of fetal, neonatal, and adult origin. The two cell types showed similar genome-wide gene expression and DNA methylation profiles. Importantly, NT-ESCs and iPSCs had comparable numbers of de novo coding mutations, but significantly more than parthenogenetic ESCs. As iPSCs, NT-ESCs displayed clone- and gene-specific aberrations in DNA methylation and allele-specific expression of imprinted genes. The occurrence of these genetic and epigenetic defects in both NT-ESCs and iPSCs suggests that they are inherent to reprogramming, regardless of derivation approach. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 27% |
| France | 2 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Spain | 2 | 6% |
| India | 2 | 6% |
| Japan | 2 | 6% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 3% |
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 52% |
| Scientists | 11 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 2% |
| Korea, Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| China | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 156 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 20% |
| Researcher | 33 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 65 | 39% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 45 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 5% |
| Engineering | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 23 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 79. 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 28 December 2017.
All research outputs
#538,400
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Cell Stem Cell
#365
of 2,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,737
of 276,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Stem Cell
#8
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,823 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 48.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 276,320 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.