↓ Skip to main content

Targeting Innate-Like T Cells in Tuberculosis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Targeting Innate-Like T Cells in Tuberculosis
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00594
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shouxiong Huang

Abstract

Peptide-specific conventional T cells have been major targets for designing most antimycobacterial vaccines. Immune responses mediated by conventional T cells exhibit a delayed onset upon primary infection and are highly variable in different human populations. In contrast, innate-like T cells quickly respond to pathogens and display effector functions without undergoing extensive clonal expansion. Specifically, the activation of innate-like T cells depends on the promiscuous interaction of highly conserved antigen-presenting molecules, non-peptidic antigens, and likely semi-invariant T cell receptors. In antimicrobial immune responses, mucosal-associated invariant T cells are activated by riboflavin precursor metabolites presented by major histocompatibility complex-related protein I, while lipid-specific T cells including natural killer T cells are activated by lipid metabolites presented by CD1 proteins. Multiple innate-like T cell subsets have been shown to be protective or responsive in mycobacterial infections. Through rapid cytokine secretion, innate-like T cells function in early defense and memory response, offering novel advantages over conventional T cells in the design of anti-tuberculosis strategies.

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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 36%
Student > Master 7 12%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 19 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 December 2016.
All research outputs
#14,601,057
of 25,703,943 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#11,882
of 32,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,923
of 424,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#130
of 286 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,703,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 424,724 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 286 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 53% of its contemporaries.