↓ Skip to main content
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 (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
9 patents
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
77 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.
Article details
Title
Differences in lymphocyte developmental potential between human embryonic stem cell and umbilical cord blood–derived hematopoietic progenitor cells
Published in
Blood, July 2008
DOI 10.1182/blood-2008-01-133801
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Hematopoietic progenitor cells derived from human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) develop into diverse mature hematopoietic lineages, including lymphocytes. Whereas functional natural killer (NK) cells can be efficiently generated in vitro from hESC-derived CD34(+) cells, studies of T- and B-cell development from hESCs have been much more limited. Here, we demonstrate that despite expressing functional Notch-1, CD34(+) cells from hESCs did not derive T cells when cocultured with OP9 cells expressing Delta-like 1, or in fetal thymus organ culture. hESC-derived CD34(+) cells also did not produce B cells in vitro. In contrast, CD34(+) cells isolated from UCB routinely generated T and B cells when cultured in the same conditions. Notably, both undifferentiated hESCs, and sorted hESC-derived populations with hematopoietic developmental potential exhibited constitutive expression of ID family genes and of transcriptional targets of stem cell factor-induced signaling. These pathways both inhibit T-cell development and promote NK-cell development. Together, these results demonstrate fundamental differences between hESC-derived hematopoietic progenitors and analogous primary human cells. Therefore, hESCs can be more readily supported to differentiate into certain cell types than others, findings that have important implications for derivation of defined lineage-committed populations from hESCs.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Philippines 1 1%
China 1 1%
Unknown 73 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 32 42%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 22%
Professor 5 6%
Student > Master 5 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 6%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 12 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 May 2025.
All research outputs
#4,836,328
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Blood
#7,031
of 33,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,616
of 95,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Blood
#60
of 231 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,238 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. 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 95,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 231 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.