↓ Skip to main content

Heterogeneity reduces sensitivity of cell death for TNF-Stimuli

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Systems Biology, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Heterogeneity reduces sensitivity of cell death for TNF-Stimuli
Published in
BMC Systems Biology, December 2011
DOI 10.1186/1752-0509-5-204
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monica Schliemann, Monica Schliemann, Eric Bullinger, Steffen Borchers, Frank Allgöwer, Rolf Findeisen, Peter Scheurich

Abstract

Apoptosis is a form of programmed cell death essential for the maintenance of homeostasis and the removal of potentially damaged cells in multicellular organisms. By binding its cognate membrane receptor, TNF receptor type 1 (TNF-R1), the proinflammatory cytokine Tumor Necrosis Factor (TNF) activates pro-apoptotic signaling via caspase activation, but at the same time also stimulates nuclear factor κB (NF-κB)-mediated survival pathways. Differential dose-response relationships of these two major TNF signaling pathways have been described experimentally and using mathematical modeling. However, the quantitative analysis of the complex interplay between pro- and anti-apoptotic signaling pathways is an open question as it is challenging for several reasons: the overall signaling network is complex, various time scales are present, and cells respond quantitatively and qualitatively in a heterogeneous manner.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Taiwan 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Unknown 61 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 35%
Researcher 14 21%
Other 6 9%
Professor 5 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 9%
Engineering 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 7 10%

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 28 December 2011.
All research outputs
#3,084,616
of 4,506,977 outputs
Outputs from BMC Systems Biology
#418
of 670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,135
of 235,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Systems Biology
#15
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,506,977 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 670 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 235,441 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.