↓ Skip to main content

The radiation-induced bystander effect: evidence and significance

Overview of attention for article published in Human & Experimental Toxicology, February 2004
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

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
The radiation-induced bystander effect: evidence and significance
Published in
Human & Experimental Toxicology, February 2004
DOI 10.1191/0960327104ht418oa
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

A multitude of biological effects observed over the past two decades in various in vivo and in vitro cell culture experiments have indicated that low dose/low fluence ionizing radiation has significantly different biological responses than high dose radiation. Exposure of cell populations to very low fluences of alpha-particles or incorporated radionuclides results in significant biological effects occurring in both the irradiated and nonirradiated cells in the population. Cells recipient of growth medium from irradiated cultures can also respond to the radiation exposure. This phenomenon, termed the 'bystander response', has been postulated to impact both the estimation of risks of exposure to ionizing radiation and radiotherapy. Amplification of radiation-induced cytotoxic and genotoxic effects by the bystander effect is in contrast to the observations of adaptive responses, which are generally induced following exposure to low dose, low linear energy transfer radiation and which tend to attenuate radiation-induced damage. In this article, the evidence for existence of radiation-induced bystander effects and our current knowledge of the biochemical and molecular events involved in mediating these effects are described. Potential similarities between factors that mediate the radiation-induced bystander and adaptive responses are highlighted.

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 States 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
France 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 73 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 23%
Student > Master 9 12%
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 20 26%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 12%
Physics and Astronomy 5 6%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 22 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 August 2019.
All research outputs
#12,345,312
of 34,365,356 outputs
Outputs from Human & Experimental Toxicology
#700
of 1,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,611
of 203,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human & Experimental Toxicology
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,365,356 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,778 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 203,313 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 6 of them.