↓ Skip to main content

Pluripotent stem cells in disease modelling and drug discovery

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, January 2016
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
35 tweeters
facebook
16 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
238 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
774 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Pluripotent stem cells in disease modelling and drug discovery
Published in
Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1038/nrm.2015.27
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yishai Avior, Ido Sagi, Nissim Benvenisty

Abstract

Experimental modelling of human disorders enables the definition of the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying diseases and the development of therapies for treating them. The availability of human pluripotent stem cells (PSCs), which are capable of self-renewal and have the potential to differentiate into virtually any cell type, can now help to overcome the limitations of animal models for certain disorders. The ability to model human diseases using cultured PSCs has revolutionized the ways in which we study monogenic, complex and epigenetic disorders, as well as early- and late-onset diseases. Several strategies are used to generate such disease models using either embryonic stem cells (ES cells) or patient-specific induced PSCs (iPSCs), creating new possibilities for the establishment of models and their use in drug screening.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 774 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Sweden 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Other 5 <1%
Unknown 750 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 177 23%
Student > Bachelor 133 17%
Researcher 131 17%
Student > Master 107 14%
Unspecified 57 7%
Other 169 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 251 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 238 31%
Unspecified 69 9%
Neuroscience 65 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 62 8%
Other 89 11%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 13 July 2018.
All research outputs
#721,100
of 12,966,964 outputs
Outputs from Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology
#183
of 1,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,706
of 334,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology
#7
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,966,964 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 1,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. 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 334,863 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.