↓ Skip to main content

Circulating monocytes: an appropriate model for bone-related study

Overview of attention for article published in Osteoporosis International, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Circulating monocytes: an appropriate model for bone-related study
Published in
Osteoporosis International, July 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00198-015-3250-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Y. Zhou, H.-W. Deng, H. Shen

Abstract

Peripheral blood monocytes (PBMs) are an important source of precursors of osteoclasts, the bone-resorbing cells and the cytokines produced by PBMs that have profound effects on osteoclast differentiation, activation, and apoptosis. So PBMs represent a highly valuable and unique working cell model for bone-related study. Finding an appropriate working cell model for clinical and (epi-)genomic studies of human skeletal disorders is a challenge. Peripheral blood monocytes (PBMs) can give rise to osteoclasts, the bone-resorbing cells. Particularly, PBMs provide the sole source of osteoclast precursors for adult peripheral skeleton where the bone marrow is normally hematopoietically inactive. PBMs can secrete potent pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines, which are important for osteoclast differentiation, activation, and apoptosis. Reduced production of PBM cytokines represents a major mechanism for the inhibitory effects of sex hormones on osteoclastogenesis and bone resorption. Abnormalities in PBMs have been linked to various skeletal disorders/traits, strongly supporting for the biological relevance of PBMs with bone metabolism and disorders. Here, we briefly review the origin and further differentiation of PBMs. In particular, we discuss the close relationship between PBMs and osteoclasts, and highlight the utility of PBMs in study the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying various skeletal disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 26%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 8 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 10 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 November 2015.
All research outputs
#14,690,968
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#2,195
of 3,609 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,147
of 264,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#32
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,609 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 264,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 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 63% of its contemporaries.