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 |
Mathematical Models for Immunology: Current State of the Art and Future Research Directions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11538-016-0214-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Raluca Eftimie, Joseph J. Gillard, Doreen A. Cantrell |
| Abstract |
The advances in genetics and biochemistry that have taken place over the last 10 years led to significant advances in experimental and clinical immunology. In turn, this has led to the development of new mathematical models to investigate qualitatively and quantitatively various open questions in immunology. In this study we present a review of some research areas in mathematical immunology that evolved over the last 10 years. To this end, we take a step-by-step approach in discussing a range of models derived to study the dynamics of both the innate and immune responses at the molecular, cellular and tissue scales. To emphasise the use of mathematics in modelling in this area, we also review some of the mathematical tools used to investigate these models. Finally, we discuss some future trends in both experimental immunology and mathematical immunology for the upcoming years. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Curaçao | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 264 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 1% |
| Unknown | 261 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 57 | 22% |
| Researcher | 45 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 19 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 49 | 19% |
| Unknown | 51 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 33 | 13% |
| Mathematics | 33 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 21 | 8% |
| Engineering | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 69 | 26% |
| Unknown | 63 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 April 2022.
All research outputs
#6,383,747
of 25,703,943 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
#203
of 1,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,343
of 328,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
#3
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,703,943 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,297 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 328,168 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.