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 |
C1 Complex: An Adaptable Proteolytic Module for Complement and Non-Complement Functions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00592 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jinhua Lu, Uday Kishore |
| Abstract |
Complement C1 is the defining component of the classical pathway. Within the C1qC1r2C1s2 complex, C1q functions as a molecular scaffold for C1r2C1s2 and C1q binding to its ligands activates these two serine proteases. The classic C1q ligands are antigen-bound antibodies and activated C1s cleaves C4 and C2 to initiate the complement cascade. Recent studies suggest broad C1 functions beyond the complement system. C1q binds to the Frizzled receptors to activate C1s, which cleaves lipoprotein receptor-related protein 6 to trigger aging-associated Wnt receptor signaling. C1q binds to apoptotic cells and the activated C1 proteases cleave nuclear antigens. C1s also cleaves MHC class I molecule and potentially numerous other proteins. The diversity of C1q ligands and C1 protease substrates renders C1 complex versatile and modular so that it can adapt to multiple molecular and cellular processes besides the complement system. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 66 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 22% |
| Researcher | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 22 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 14 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 20 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,370,994
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#4,743
of 31,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,839
of 327,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#76
of 380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,531 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 84% 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 327,119 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 380 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.