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 |
Potential Roles of the Retinoblastoma Protein in Regulating Genome Editing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fcell.2018.00081 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuning Jiang, Wai Kit Chu |
| Abstract |
Genome editing is an important tool for modifying genomic DNA through introducing DNA insertion or deletion at specific locations of a genome. Recently CRISPR/Cas9 has been widely employed to improve the efficiency of genome editing. The Cas9 nuclease creates site-specific double strand breaks (DSBs) at targeted loci in the genome. Subsequently, the DSBs are repaired by two pathways: Homologous Recombination (HR) and Non-Homologous End-Joining (NHEJ). HR has been considered as "error-free" because it repairs DSBs by copying DNA sequences from a homologous DNA template, while NHEJ is "error-prone" as there are base deletions or insertions at the breakage site. Recently, RB1, a gene that is commonly mutated in retinoblastoma, has been reported to affect the repair efficiencies of HR and NHEJ. This review focuses on the roles of RB1 in repairing DNA DSBs, which have impacts on the precision and consequences of the genome editing, both at the targeted loci and the overall genome. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 15% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 50% |
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 16 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,542,250
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
#4,052
of 9,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,320
of 329,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
#29
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 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 9,165 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 52% 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 329,833 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 49 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.