↓ Skip to main content

Programmed Necrosis

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Programmed Necrosis'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Tools in the Art of Studying Necroptosis
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Loss-of-Function RNAi Screen to Identify Necrosis-Signaling Molecules
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Chemical Library Screens to Identify Pharmacological Modulators of Necroptosis
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Distinguishing Necroptosis from Apoptosis
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 Methods for Studying TNF-Mediated Necroptosis in Cultured Cells
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Analysis of Necroptosis in Bone Marrow-Derived Macrophages
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 Generation and Use of Chimeric RIP Kinase Molecules to Study Necroptosis
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Detection of MLKL Oligomerization During Programmed Necrosis
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Analysis of Cytokine- and Influenza A Virus-Driven RIPK3 Necrosome Formation
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Detection of RIPK1 in the FADD-Containing Death Inducing Signaling Complex (DISC) During Necroptosis
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Use of RIP1 Kinase Small-Molecule Inhibitors in Studying Necroptosis
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Analyzing Necroptosis Using an RIPK1 Kinase Inactive Mouse Model of TNF Shock
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Assessment of In Vivo Kidney Cell Death: Acute Kidney Injury
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Assessment of In Vivo Kidney Cell Death: Glomerular Injury
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Detection of Necroptosis by Phospho-RIPK3 Immunohistochemical Labeling
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Characterization of the TNFR1-SC Using “Modified Tandem Affinity Purification” in Conjunction with Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS)
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 Monitoring RIPK1 Phosphorylation in the TNFR1 Signaling Complex
  19. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 18 Analysis of CYLD Proteolysis by CASPASE 8 in Bone Marrow-Derived Macrophages
Attention for Chapter 14: Assessment of In Vivo Kidney Cell Death: Glomerular Injury
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 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.
Chapter title
Assessment of In Vivo Kidney Cell Death: Glomerular Injury
Chapter number 14
Book title
Programmed Necrosis
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-8754-2_14
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-8753-5, 978-1-4939-8754-2
Authors

Wulf Tonnus, Moath Al-Mekhlafi, Florian Gembardt, Christian Hugo, Andreas Linkermann, Tonnus, Wulf, Al-Mekhlafi, Moath, Gembardt, Florian, Hugo, Christian, Linkermann, Andreas

Abstract

The glomerulus functions as the filtration unit of the kidney. The mesangial, endothelial, and podocyte cells of the glomerulus exhibit the three clinically most important cell types, which are involved in diverse pathologic processes. Cell death has hardly been investigated in these cells but may be of critical importance to the pathogenesis of nephrotic syndrome, nephritic syndrome, focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS), mesangial proliferation, and thrombonic microangiopathy (which involves dysfunction and death of glomerular endothelial cells). The complexity of the glomerulus is frequently affected in autoimmune disorders, which may elicit cell death in mesangial cells and glomerular endothelia. Artificial antisera are used to induce anti-mesangial cell serum-induced mesangiolysis and selective endothelial cell injury, respectively. Genetic variations result in loss of function of podocytes and nephrotic syndrome, which may encompass similar cell death mechanisms as the ones that are observed in the model of secondary focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). The following protocols describe our current arsenal to target glomerular cells in vivo.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 20%
Unknown 3 60%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 40%
Unknown 3 60%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 May 2019.
All research outputs
#15,543,612
of 23,100,534 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#5,412
of 13,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,169
of 442,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#596
of 1,499 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,100,534 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,208 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 442,691 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.