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 |
Role of Feline Immunodeficiency Virus in Lymphomagenesis—Going Alone or Colluding?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
ILAR Journal, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1093/ilar/ilv047 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah Kaye, Wenqi Wang, Craig Miller, Alicia McLuckie, Julia A. Beatty, Chris K. Grant, Sue VandeWoude, Helle Bielefeldt-Ohmann |
| Abstract |
Feline immunodeficiency virus (FIV) is a naturally occurring lentivirus of domestic and nondomestic feline species. Infection in domestic cats leads to immune dysfunction via mechanisms similar to those caused by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and, as such, is a valuable natural animal model for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) in humans. An association between FIV and an increased incidence of neoplasia has long been recognized, with frequencies of up to 20% in FIV-positive cats recorded in some studies. This is similar to the rate of neoplasia seen in HIV-positive individuals, and in both species neoplasia typically requires several years to arise. The most frequently reported type of neoplasia associated with FIV infection is lymphoma. Here we review the possible mechanisms involved in FIV lymphomagenesis, including the possible involvement of coinfections, notably those with gamma-herpesviruses. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 16 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 17 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 35% |
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 05 April 2016.
All research outputs
#18,449,393
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from ILAR Journal
#448
of 512 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,314
of 301,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ILAR Journal
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 512 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 301,001 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.