↓ Skip to main content

The mononuclear phagocyte system

Overview of attention for article published in Current Opinion in Immunology, December 2005
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
493 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
552 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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.
Title
The mononuclear phagocyte system
Published in
Current Opinion in Immunology, December 2005
DOI 10.1016/j.coi.2005.11.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

David A Hume

Abstract

The mononuclear phagocyte system (MPS) has been defined as a family of cells comprising bone marrow progenitors, blood monocytes and tissue macrophages. Macrophages are a major cell population in most of the tissues in the body, and their numbers increase further in inflammation, wounding and malignancy. Their trophic roles for other cell types in development and homeostasis are becoming increasingly evident. The receptor for macrophage colony-stimulating factor (CSF-1R) is expressed in a large proportion of cells considered to be mononuclear phagocytes, including antigen-presenting dendritic cells, which can be considered a specialized adaptive state rather than a separate lineage. The unity of the MPS is challenged by evidence that there is a separate embryonic phagocyte lineage, by the transdifferentiation and fusion of MPS cells with other cell types, and by evidence of local renewal of tissue macrophage populations as opposed to monocyte recruitment. The concept of the MPS may have partly outlived its usefulness.

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 552 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 8 1%
United States 5 <1%
Germany 3 <1%
Australia 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Lithuania 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 528 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 124 22%
Researcher 95 17%
Student > Master 80 14%
Student > Bachelor 63 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 5%
Other 69 13%
Unknown 96 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 164 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 85 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 65 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 52 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 23 4%
Other 60 11%
Unknown 103 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 21 September 2023.
All research outputs
#2,147,786
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Current Opinion in Immunology
#102
of 2,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,786
of 163,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Opinion in Immunology
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,021 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 163,856 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 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