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 |
Type I Interferons and Natural Killer Cell Regulation in Cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00304 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lena Müller, Petra Aigner, Dagmar Stoiber |
| Abstract |
Type I interferons (IFNs) are known to mediate antitumor effects against several tumor types and have therefore been commonly used in clinical anticancer treatment. However, how IFN signaling exerts its beneficial effects is only partially understood. The clinically relevant activity of type I IFNs has been mainly attributed to their role in tumor immune surveillance. Different mechanisms have been postulated to explain how type I IFNs stimulate the immune system. On the one hand, they modulate innate immune cell subsets such as natural killer (NK) cells. On the other hand, type I IFNs also influence adaptive immune responses. Here, we review evidence for the impact of type I IFNs on immune surveillance against cancer and highlight the role of NK cells therein. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 7% |
| Germany | 1 | 7% |
| United States | 1 | 7% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 7% |
| Spain | 1 | 7% |
| Austria | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 13 | 93% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 164 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 40 | 24% |
| Researcher | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 10% |
| Unknown | 43 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 35 | 21% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 24 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 12% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 6% |
| Unknown | 49 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 23 March 2023.
All research outputs
#3,075,196
of 25,703,943 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#3,215
of 32,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,491
of 324,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#56
of 425 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,703,943 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 324,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 425 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.