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 |
Genetically-Informed Patient Selection for iPSC Studies of Complex Diseases May Aid in Reducing Cellular Heterogeneity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncel.2017.00164 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stephanie D. Hoekstra, Sven Stringer, Vivi M. Heine, Danielle Posthuma |
| Abstract |
Induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technology is more and more used for the study of genetically complex human disease but is challenged by variability, sample size and polygenicity. We discuss studies involving iPSC-derived neurons from patients with Schizophrenia (SCZ), to exemplify that heterogeneity in sampling strategy complicate the detection of disease mechanisms. We offer a solution to controlling variability within and between iPSC studies by using specific patient selection strategies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 72 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Researcher | 12 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 19 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 21 | 29% |
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 11 August 2017.
All research outputs
#15,466,074
of 22,982,639 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#2,684
of 4,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,355
of 317,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#66
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,982,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 317,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.