↓ Skip to main content

Cell scale host-pathogen modeling: another branch in the evolution of constraint-based methods

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Cell scale host-pathogen modeling: another branch in the evolution of constraint-based methods
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2015.01032
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neema Jamshidi, Anu Raghunathan

Abstract

Constraint-based models have become popular methods for systems biology as they enable the integration of complex, disparate datasets in a biologically cohesive framework that also supports the description of biological processes in terms of basic physicochemical constraints and relationships. The scope, scale, and application of genome scale models have grown from single cell bacteria to multi-cellular interaction modeling; host-pathogen modeling represents one of these examples at the current horizon of constraint-based methods. There are now a small number of examples of host-pathogen constraint-based models in the literature, however there has not yet been a definitive description of the methodology required for the functional integration of genome scale models in order to generate simulation capable host-pathogen models. Herein we outline a systematic procedure to produce functional host-pathogen models, highlighting steps which require debugging and iterative revisions in order to successfully build a functional model. The construction of such models will enable the exploration of host-pathogen interactions by leveraging the growing wealth of omic data in order to better understand mechanism of infection and identify novel therapeutic strategies.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

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 %
United States 2 3%
Spain 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 68 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 22%
Student > Master 14 19%
Researcher 9 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 17 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 8%
Engineering 4 6%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 19 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,774,664
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#17,179
of 24,800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,315
of 277,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#274
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,800 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 277,991 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 433 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.