↓ Skip to main content

An interactive reference framework for modeling a dynamic immune system

Overview of attention for article published in Science, July 2015
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)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

1 blog
19 tweeters
1 Facebook page


110 Dimensions

Readers on

524 Mendeley
6 CiteULike
An interactive reference framework for modeling a dynamic immune system
Published in
Science, July 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.1259425
Pubmed ID

M. H. Spitzer, P. F. Gherardini, G. K. Fragiadakis, N. Bhattacharya, R. T. Yuan, A. N. Hotson, R. Finck, Y. Carmi, E. R. Zunder, W. J. Fantl, S. C. Bendall, E. G. Engleman, G. P. Nolan


Immune cells function in an interacting hierarchy that coordinates the activities of various cell types according to genetic and environmental contexts. We developed graphical approaches to construct an extensible immune reference map from mass cytometry data of cells from different organs, incorporating landmark cell populations as flags on the map to compare cells from distinct samples. The maps recapitulated canonical cellular phenotypes and revealed reproducible, tissue-specific deviations. The approach revealed influences of genetic variation and circadian rhythms on immune system structure, enabled direct comparisons of murine and human blood cell phenotypes, and even enabled archival fluorescence-based flow cytometry data to be mapped onto the reference framework. This foundational reference map provides a working definition of systemic immune organization to which new data can be integrated to reveal deviations driven by genetics, environment, or pathology.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 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 524 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 12 2%
Germany 3 <1%
Switzerland 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
France 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Other 8 2%
Unknown 487 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 152 29%
Researcher 151 29%
Student > Master 38 7%
Other 37 7%
Unspecified 31 6%
Other 115 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 204 39%
Immunology and Microbiology 76 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 70 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 61 12%
Unspecified 41 8%
Other 72 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 03 April 2017.
All research outputs
of 12,358,644 outputs
Outputs from Science
of 56,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 235,715 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
of 1,037 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,358,644 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 56,299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 235,715 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 1,037 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.