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 |
Non-coding RNAs as epigenetic regulator of glioma stem-like cell differentiation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fgene.2014.00014 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Keisuke Katsushima, Yutaka Kondo |
| Abstract |
Glioblastomas show heterogeneous histological features. These distinct phenotypic states are thought to be associated with the presence of glioma stem cells (GSCs), which are highly tumorigenic and self-renewing sub-population of tumor cells that have different functional characteristics. Differentiation of GSCs may be regulated by multi-tiered epigenetic mechanisms that orchestrate the expression of thousands of genes. One such regulatory mechanism involves functional non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs), such as microRNAs (miRNAs); a large number of ncRNAs have been identified and shown to regulate the expression of genes associated with cell differentiation programs. Given the roles of miRNAs in cell differentiation, it is possible they are involved in the regulation of gene expression networks in GSCs that are important for the maintenance of the pluripotent state and for directing differentiation. Here, we review recent findings on ncRNAs associated with GSC differentiation and discuss how these ncRNAs contribute to the establishment of tissue heterogeneity during glioblastoma tumor formation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| India | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 49 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 30% |
| Researcher | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 16% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Psychology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 March 2014.
All research outputs
#14,773,697
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#4,459
of 11,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,033
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#36
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,758 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 305,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.