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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The role of interferon-gamma in the increased tuberculosis risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, October 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10096-007-0395-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. E. Stalenhoef, B. Alisjahbana, E. J. Nelwan, J. van der Ven-Jongekrijg, T. H. M. Ottenhoff, J. W. M. van der Meer, R. H Nelwan, M. G. Netea, R. van Crevel |
| Abstract |
As patients with diabetes mellitus are at increased risk of developing tuberculosis, we hypothesized that this susceptibility to mycobacterial infection is due to a defective Th1-cytokine response. To explore this hypothesis, we examined four groups of subjects in Indonesia: 23 patients with tuberculosis, 34 patients with tuberculosis and diabetes, 32 patients with diabetes only and 36 healthy controls. Ex-vivo production of interferon (IFN)gamma, tumour necrosis factor-alpha and interleukin (IL)-1beta, 6, 10, -12 and -4 was measured following stimulation with Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Escherichia coli lipopolysaccharide and phytohaemagglutinin. Patients with active tuberculosis were found to have lower IFNgamma levels and a higher production of other pro-inflammatory cytokines and IL-4, both in the presence and absence of diabetes. Diabetes patients without tuberculosis, however, showed strongly reduced non-specific IFNgamma production, which is essential for inhibition of the initial growth of M. tuberculosis. Our data suggest that a defective non-specific immune response in diabetes may contribute to an increased susceptibility to develop tuberculosis. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Philippines | 1 | <1% |
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 158 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 15% |
| Researcher | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 10% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 31 | 19% |
| Unknown | 39 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 57 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 14 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 17 | 10% |
| Unknown | 40 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,377,613
of 22,660,862 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#635
of 2,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,695
of 76,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#3
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,660,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,767 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 76,143 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.