↓ Skip to main content

F11R Is a Novel Monocyte Prognostic Biomarker for Malignant Glioma

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, October 2013
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
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
F11R Is a Novel Monocyte Prognostic Biomarker for Malignant Glioma
Published in
PLoS ONE, October 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0077571
Pubmed ID
Authors

Winnie W. Pong, Jason Walker, Todd Wylie, Vincent Magrini, Jingqin Luo, Ryan J. Emnett, Jaebok Choi, Matthew L. Cooper, Malachi Griffith, Obi L. Griffith, Joshua B. Rubin, Gregory N. Fuller, David Piwnica-Worms, Xi Feng, Dolores Hambardzumyan, John F. DiPersio, Elaine R. Mardis, David H. Gutmann, Pong WW, Walker J, Wylie T, Magrini V, Luo J, Emnett RJ, Choi J, Cooper ML, Griffith M, Griffith OL, Rubin JB, Fuller GN, Piwnica-Worms D, Feng X, Hambardzumyan D, Dipersio JF, Mardis ER, Gutmann DH, Michael Platten

Abstract

Brain tumors (gliomas) contain large populations of infiltrating macrophages and recruited microglia, which in experimental murine glioma models promote tumor formation and progression. Among the barriers to understanding the contributions of these stromal elements to high-grade glioma (glioblastoma; GBM) biology is the relative paucity of tools to characterize infiltrating macrophages and resident microglia. In this study, we leveraged multiple RNA analysis platforms to identify new monocyte markers relevant to GBM patient outcome.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 38 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 28%
Researcher 10 25%
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 28%
Neuroscience 9 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Unspecified 2 5%
Other 3 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 02 November 2013.
All research outputs
#393,017
of 6,561,235 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#9,923
of 99,716 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,482
of 117,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#502
of 3,954 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,561,235 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99,716 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 117,066 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,954 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.