↓ Skip to main content

Osteoclast-Derived Coupling Factors in Bone Remodeling

Overview of attention for article published in Calcified Tissue International, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
124 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Osteoclast-Derived Coupling Factors in Bone Remodeling
Published in
Calcified Tissue International, May 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00223-013-9741-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kim Henriksen, Morten A. Karsdal, T. John Martin

Abstract

In the bone remodeling process that takes place throughout the skeleton at bone multicellular units, intercellular communication processes are crucial. The osteoblast lineage has long been known to program osteoclast formation and hence resorption, but the preservation of bone mass and integrity requires tight control of remodeling. This needs local controls that ensure availability of mesenchymal precursors and the provision of local signals that promote differentiation through the osteoblast lineage. Some signals can come from growth factors released from resorbed bone matrix, and there is increasing evidence that the osteoclast lineage itself produces factors that can either enhance or inhibit osteoblast differentiation and hence bone formation. A number of such factors have been identified from predominantly in vitro experiments. The coupling of bone formation to resorption is increasingly recognized as a complex, dynamic process that results from the input of many local factors of cell and matrix origin that can either promote or inhibit bone formation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 3 2%
United States 2 2%
Unknown 124 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 21%
Student > Master 24 19%
Researcher 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 21 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 18%
Engineering 9 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 23 18%
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 26 June 2013.
All research outputs
#17,690,153
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Calcified Tissue International
#1,422
of 1,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#140,077
of 195,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Calcified Tissue International
#10
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 195,531 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.