↓ Skip to main content

Efficient Induction of Extrinsic Cell Death by Dandelion Root Extract in Human Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML) Cells

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
55 X users
patent
2 patents
facebook
28 Facebook pages
googleplus
5 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Efficient Induction of Extrinsic Cell Death by Dandelion Root Extract in Human Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML) Cells
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0030604
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pamela Ovadje, Caroline Hamm, Siyaram Pandey

Abstract

Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML) is a heterogeneous disease that is not only hard to diagnose and classify, but is also highly resistant to treatment. Available forms of therapy for this disease have not shown significant effects and patients rapidly develop resistance early on in therapy. These factors lead to the very poor prognosis observed with CMML patients, with median survival duration between 12 and 24 months after diagnosis. This study is therefore centered around evaluating the selective efficacy of a natural extract from dandelion roots, in inducing programmed cell death in aggressive and resistant CMML cell lines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 55 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Ghana 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 65 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 22%
Other 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 12%
Student > Master 7 10%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 10%
Chemistry 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 13 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 109. 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 20 April 2024.
All research outputs
#393,922
of 25,758,695 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#5,548
of 224,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,696
of 169,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#66
of 3,589 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,695 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 224,475 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 169,803 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,589 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.