↓ Skip to main content

Ontogeny and Polarization of Macrophages in Inflammation: Blood Monocytes Versus Tissue Macrophages

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
194 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
426 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
Ontogeny and Polarization of Macrophages in Inflammation: Blood Monocytes Versus Tissue Macrophages
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2015
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00683
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adwitia Dey, Joselyn Allen, Pamela A. Hankey-Giblin

Abstract

The explosion of new information in recent years on the origin of macrophages in the steady-state and in the context of inflammation has opened up numerous new avenues of investigation and possibilities for therapeutic intervention. In contrast to the classical model of macrophage development, it is clear that tissue-resident macrophages can develop from yolk sac-derived erythro-myeloid progenitors, fetal liver progenitors, and bone marrow-derived monocytes. Under both homeostatic conditions and in response to pathophysiological insult, the contribution of these distinct sources of macrophages varies significantly between tissues. Furthermore, while all of these populations of macrophages appear to be capable of adopting the polarized M1/M2 phenotypes, their respective contribution to inflammation, resolution of inflammation, and tissue repair remains poorly understood and is likely to be tissue- and disease-dependent. A better understanding of the ontology and polarization capacity of macrophages in homeostasis and disease will be essential for the development of novel therapies that target the inherent plasticity of macrophages in the treatment of acute and chronic inflammatory disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 426 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 4 <1%
United States 3 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 415 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 98 23%
Researcher 77 18%
Student > Master 60 14%
Student > Bachelor 37 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 5%
Other 69 16%
Unknown 64 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 126 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 60 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 60 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 54 13%
Neuroscience 12 3%
Other 36 8%
Unknown 78 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#6,373,276
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#6,611
of 31,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,710
of 359,637 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#31
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 359,637 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.