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
| Chapter title |
Bioinformatic Assessment of Macrophage Activation by the Innate Immune System
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 2 |
| Book title |
Innate Immune Activation
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-7519-8_2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-7518-1, 978-1-4939-7519-8
|
| Authors |
Thomas Ulas, Joachim L. Schultze, Marc Beyer |
| Abstract |
Weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) allows for the identification and characterization of cell type-specific gene modules in complex transcriptome datasets. Here, we use a microarray dataset of human macrophages comprising 29 conditions and 299 samples generated by differentiation of CD14+ monocytes into macrophages followed by in vitro stimulations to identify stimulation-specific gene modules. These gene modules can be used for experimental validation, as well as further bioinformatic analysis to determine key pathways or upstream transcription factors. |
X Demographics
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 8 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 25% |
| Researcher | 2 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 38% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 25% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,541,834
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#2,339
of 13,157 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,693
of 442,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#230
of 1,498 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,157 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 442,295 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,498 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.