The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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.
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 |
In Vivo Applications of CRISPR-Based Genome Editing in the Retina
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fcell.2018.00053 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wenhan Yu, Zhijian Wu |
| Abstract |
The rapidly evolving CRISPR-based genome editing technology is bringing revolutionary changes to the entirety of the life sciences. In this mini-review, we summarize the recent progress of in vivo applications of CRISPR genome editing in retinal studies. Non-viral and viral vector mediated delivery have been developed for temporary or persistent expression of CRISPR components in retinal cells. Although in theory CRISPR-based genome editing can correct a large number of mutant genes responsible for a variety of inherited retinal disorders (IRDs), precise gene modification relies on homology-directed repair (HDR)-the efficiency of which is not currently high enough for meaningful benefit. Development of CRISPR-based treatment for retinal diseases thus far has been mainly focused on gene knock-out or gene deletion in which the highly efficient non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) repair pathway is involved. Therapeutic benefits have been achieved in a few rodent models of retinal diseases following CRISPR treatment. The in vivo applications of CRISPR have also facilitated studies of gene function in the retina. As off-target events and immune responses are still the major concerns, continuous development of safer CRISPR genome editing systems is prerequisite for its clinical applications. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 74 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 14 | 19% |
| Unknown | 18 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 12% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2018.
All research outputs
#14,389,551
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
#2,882
of 9,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,399
of 326,863 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
#18
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,132 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 326,863 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.