↓ Skip to main content

Non-coding RNA and the Reproductive System

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 7: Non-coding RNAs in Mammary Gland Development and Disease.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
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.
Chapter title
Non-coding RNAs in Mammary Gland Development and Disease.
Chapter number 7
Book title
Non-coding RNA and the Reproductive System
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/978-94-017-7417-8_7
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-40-177415-4, 978-9-40-177417-8
Authors

Sandhu, Gurveen K, Milevskiy, Michael J G, Wilson, Wesley, Shewan, Annette M, Brown, Melissa A, Gurveen K. Sandhu, Michael J. G. Milevskiy, Wesley Wilson, Annette M. Shewan, Melissa A. Brown, Sandhu, Gurveen K., Milevskiy, Michael J. G., Shewan, Annette M., Brown, Melissa A.

Editors

Dagmar Wilhelm, Pascal Bernard

Abstract

Non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs) are untranslated RNA molecules that function to regulate the expression of numerous genes and associated biochemical pathways and cellular functions. NcRNAs include small interfering RNAs (siRNAs), microRNAs (miRNAs), PIWI-interacting RNAs (piRNAs), small nucleolar RNAs (snoRNAs) and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs). They participate in the regulation of all developmental processes and are frequently aberrantly expressed or functionally defective in disease. This Chapter will focus on the role of ncRNAs, in particular miRNAs and lncRNAs, in mammary gland development and disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 29%
Researcher 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Unknown 4 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,778,896
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#3,101
of 4,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,352
of 388,813 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#236
of 403 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,951 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 388,813 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 403 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.