↓ Skip to main content

How Lipid-Specific T Cells Become Effectors: The Differentiation of iNKT Subsets

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
How Lipid-Specific T Cells Become Effectors: The Differentiation of iNKT Subsets
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, June 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.01450
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haiguang Wang, Kristin A. Hogquist

Abstract

In contrast to peptide-recognizing T cells, invariant natural killer T (iNKT) cells express a semi-invariant T cell receptor that specifically recognizes self- or foreign-lipids presented by CD1d molecules. There are three major functionally distinct effector states for iNKT cells. Owning to these innate-like effector states, iNKT cells have been implicated in early protective immunity against pathogens. Yet, growing evidence suggests that iNKT cells play a role in tissue homeostasis as well. In this review, we discuss current knowledge about the underlying mechanisms that regulate the effector states of iNKT subsets, with a highlight on the roles of a variety of transcription factors and describe how each subset influences different facets of thymus homeostasis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 25%
Researcher 13 22%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 23 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 July 2023.
All research outputs
#3,780,684
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#4,282
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,966
of 342,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#139
of 727 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 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 86% 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 342,601 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 727 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.