Toll-Like Receptors
Humana Press, New York, NY
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 |
Flow Cytometry-Based Bead-Binding Assay for Measuring Receptor Ligand Specificity
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 8 |
| Book title |
Toll-Like Receptors
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-3335-8_8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-3333-4, 978-1-4939-3335-8
|
| Authors |
Joris K. Sprokholt, Nina Hertoghs, Teunis B. H. Geijtenbeek, Sprokholt, Joris K., Hertoghs, Nina, Geijtenbeek, Teunis B. H. |
| Abstract |
In this chapter we describe a fluorescent bead-binding assay, which is an efficient and feasible method to measure interaction between ligands and receptors on cells. In principle, any ligand can be coated on fluorescent beads either directly or via antibodies. Binding between ligand-coated beads and cells can be measured by flow cytometry, which results in an easily quantifiable readout. Furthermore, it allows measuring of binding by specific cell subsets within a mixed cell population. Overall, this method is a convenient and easily standardized assay for measuring binding. |
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.
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.
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 38% |
| Professor | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
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 20 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,587,406
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#7,965
of 13,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#285,661
of 394,692 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#845
of 1,471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,166 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 394,692 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,471 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.