↓ Skip to main content

Neutrophil Extracellular Traps Go Viral

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
206 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
Neutrophil Extracellular Traps Go Viral
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, September 2016
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00366
Pubmed ID
Authors

Günther Schönrich, Martin J. Raftery

Abstract

Neutrophils are the most numerous immune cells. Their importance as the first line of defense against bacterial and fungal pathogens is well described. In contrast, the role of neutrophils in controlling viral infections is less clear. Bacterial and fungal pathogens can stimulate neutrophils extracellular traps (NETs) in a process called NETosis. Although NETosis has previously been described as a special form of programmed cell death, there are forms of NET production that do not end with the demise of neutrophils. As an end result of NETosis, genomic DNA complexed with microbicidal proteins is expelled from neutrophils. These structures can kill pathogens or at least prevent their local spread within host tissue. On the other hand, disproportionate NET formation can cause local or systemic damage. Only recently, it was recognized that viruses can also induce NETosis. In this review, we discuss the mechanisms by which NETs are produced in the context of viral infection and how this may contribute to both antiviral immunity and immunopathology. Finally, we shed light on viral immune evasion mechanisms targeting NETs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 205 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 15%
Researcher 26 13%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Master 24 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Other 27 13%
Unknown 61 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 38 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 12%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 2%
Other 18 9%
Unknown 68 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 August 2020.
All research outputs
#7,356,550
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#8,556
of 31,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,694
of 328,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#44
of 160 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 328,307 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 160 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.