Article
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 |
Isolation and Identification of Murine Serous Cavity Macrophages
|
|---|---|
| Book title |
Macrophages
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-7837-3_5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-7836-6, 978-1-4939-7837-3
|
| Authors |
Calum C. Bain, Stephen J. Jenkins |
| Abstract |
Accessibility and ease of leukocyte extraction led to the peritoneal cavity becoming one of the most commonly used sites to obtain primary macrophages for in vitro analyses and to model inflammation. However, the advent of multiparameter flow cytometry has highlighted the complexity of the mononuclear phagocyte compartment of the serous cavities, which contains multiple populations of macrophages, dendritic cells, and monocytes that coexist with other leukocytes. Given that serous cavity macrophages are known to contribute to both the maintenance of tissue homeostasis and the generation and resolution of inflammation, a thorough understanding of the cells that comprise the peritoneal macrophage compartment, how to identify them from related mononuclear phagocytes, and the processes required to isolate them for ex vivo and in vitro analysis is important if we are to fully understand their function in different tissue contexts. Here, we detail commonly used methods to isolate leukocytes from the peritoneal and pleural cavities and describe reliable strategies to identify the discrete populations of mononuclear phagocytes in these sites. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 Kingdom | 7 | 70% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 5 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 38% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 38% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 15% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Design | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
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 17 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,566,938
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#1,519
of 13,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,355
of 442,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#137
of 1,499 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,204 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 442,629 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,499 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.