↓ Skip to main content

Polarized Cells, Polarized Views: Asymmetric Cell Division in Hematopoietic Cells

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2014
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
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 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
Polarized Cells, Polarized Views: Asymmetric Cell Division in Hematopoietic Cells
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kim Pham, Faruk Sacirbegovic, Sarah M. Russell

Abstract

It has long been recognized that alterations in cell shape and polarity play important roles in coordinating lymphocyte functions. In the last decade, a new aspect of lymphocyte polarity has attracted much attention, termed asymmetric cell division (ACD). ACD has previously been shown to dictate or influence many aspects of development in model organisms such as the worm and the fly, and to be disrupted in disease. Recent observations that ACD also occurs in lymphocytes led to exciting speculations that ACD might influence lymphocyte differentiation and function, and leukemia. Dissecting the role that ACD might play in these activities has not been straightforward, and the evidence to date for a functional role in lymphocyte fate determination has been controversial. In this review, we discuss the evidence to date for ACD in lymphocytes, and how it might influence lymphocyte fate. We also discuss current gaps in our knowledge, and suggest approaches to definitively test the physiological role of ACD in lymphocytes.

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 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 28%
Student > Master 10 15%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 22%
Mathematics 2 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 12 18%
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 03 February 2014.
All research outputs
#20,791,995
of 26,414,132 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#23,644
of 33,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#239,293
of 323,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#59
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,414,132 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. 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 323,039 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.