↓ Skip to main content

Microparticles as Immune Regulators in Infectious Disease – An Opinion

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Microparticles as Immune Regulators in Infectious Disease – An Opinion
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2011.00067
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zheng Lung Ling, Valery Combes, Georges E. Grau, Nicholas J. C. King

Abstract

Despite their clear relationship to immunology, few existing studies have examined the potential role of microparticles (MP) in infectious disease. MP have a different size range from exosomes and apoptotic bodies, with which they are often grouped and arise by different mechanisms in association with inflammatory cytokine action or stress on the source cell. Infection with pathogens usually leads to the expression of a range of inflammatory cytokines and chemokines, as well as significant stress in both infected and uninfected cells. It is thus reasonable to infer that infection-associated inflammation also leads to MP production. MP are produced by most of the major cell types in the immune system, and appear to be involved at both innate and adaptive levels, potentially serving different functions in each. Thus, they do not appear to have a universal function; instead their functions are source- or stimulus-dependent, although likely to be primarily either pro- or anti-inflammatory. We argue that in infectious diseases, MP may be able to deliver antigen, derived from the biological cargo acquired from their cells of origin, to antigen-presenting cells. Another potential benefit of MP would be to transfer and/or disseminate phenotype and function to target cells. However, MP may also potentially be manipulated, particularly by intracellular pathogens, for survival advantage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 38 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 26%
Researcher 9 23%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Other 5 13%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 July 2012.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#22,575
of 31,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,512
of 190,479 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#22
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. 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 190,479 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.