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 |
Merging concepts - coupling an agent-based model of hematopoietic stem cells with an ODE model of granulopoiesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Systems Biology, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1752-0509-7-117 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Axel Krinner, Ingo Roeder, Markus Loeffler, Markus Scholz |
| Abstract |
Hematopoiesis is a complex process involving different cell types and feedback mechanisms mediated by cytokines. This complexity stimulated various models with different scopes and applications. A combination of complementary models promises to provide their mutual confirmation and to explain a broader range of scenarios. Here we propose a combination of an ordinary differential equation (ODE) model of human granulopoiesis and an agent-based model (ABM) of hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) organization. The first describes the dynamics of bone marrow cell stages and circulating cells under various perturbations such as G-CSF treatment or chemotherapy. In contrast to the ODE model describing cell numbers, our ABM focuses on the organization of individual cells in the stem population. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 50 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 18 | 35% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 4 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 23% |
| Engineering | 9 | 17% |
| Mathematics | 9 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 6 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,376,927
of 22,761,738 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#834
of 1,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,949
of 213,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#30
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,761,738 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,142 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 213,711 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 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.