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 |
Nutritional and Nanotechnological Modulators of Microglia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00270 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dusica Maysinger, Issan Zhang |
| Abstract |
Microglia are the essential responders to alimentary, pharmacological, and nanotechnological immunomodulators. These neural cells play multiple roles as surveyors, sculptors, and guardians of essential parts of complex neural circuitries. Microglia can play dual roles in the central nervous system; they can be deleterious and/or protective. The immunomodulatory effects of alimentary components, gut microbiota, and nanotechnological products have been investigated in microglia at the single-cell level and in vivo using intravital imaging approaches, and different biochemical assays. This review highlights some of the emerging questions and topics from studies involving alimentation, microbiota, nanotechnological products, and associated problems in this area of research. Some of the advantages and limitations of in vitro and in vivo models used to study the neuromodulatory effects of these factors, as well as the merits and pitfalls of intravital imaging modalities employed are presented. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 2 | 22% |
| United States | 2 | 22% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 11% |
| Qatar | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 10 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 08 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,238,835
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#6,325
of 31,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,243
of 372,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#27
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 372,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.