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 |
Asymmetric Cell Division and Template DNA Co-Segregation in Cancer Stem Cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in oncology, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fonc.2014.00226 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sharon R. Pine, Wenyu Liu |
| Abstract |
During tissue homeostasis, normal stem cells self-renew and repopulate the diverse cell types found within the tissue via a series of carefully controlled symmetric and asymmetric cell divisions (ACDs). The notion that solid tumors comprise a subset of cancer stem cells (CSCs) with dysregulated self-renewal and excessive symmetric cell divisions has led to numerous studies aimed to elucidate the mechanisms regulating ACD under steady-state conditions, during stem-cell expansion and in cancer. In this perspective, we focus on a type of asymmetry that can be established during ACD, called non-random co-segregation of template DNA, which has been identified across numerous species, cell types, and cancers. We discuss the role of p53 loss in maintaining self-renewal in both normal and malignant cells. We then review our current knowledge of the mechanisms underlying co-segregation of template DNA strands and the stem-cell pathways associated with it in normal and CSCs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 37% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 14 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 14% |
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 21 August 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in oncology
#11,313
of 22,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,120
of 247,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in oncology
#49
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 22,416 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 247,555 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.