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 |
Natural killer cell heterogeneity: cellular dysfunction and significance in HIV-1 immuno-pathogenesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00018-015-1911-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Wahid Ansari, Fareed Ahmad, Dirk Meyer-Olson, Adeeba Kamarulzaman, Roland Jacobs, Reinhold E. Schmidt |
| Abstract |
Natural killer (NK) cells are innate immune effectors that provide first line of defence against viruses. Human NK cells are heterogeneous in nature, and their functions rely on a dynamic balance between germ-line-encoded activating and inhibitory receptors. HIV-1 infection results in altered NK cell receptor repertoire and impaired effector functions including the ability to lyse virus-infected cells and secretion of antiviral cytokine IFN-γ. Over the last decade, additional NK cell subset-specific molecules have been identified, leading to emergence of a more complex cellular diversity than previously thought. Herein, we discuss NK cell subset redistribution, altered receptor repertoire and influence of interaction of polymorphic leucocyte antigen (HLA) and killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptors (KIR) on HIV-1 disease progression. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 21% |
| Researcher | 8 | 21% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 3 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 8 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 18% |
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 01 October 2015.
All research outputs
#19,201,293
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#3,458
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,817
of 265,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#44
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 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 4,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 265,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.