↓ Skip to main content

Understanding of dopant-induced osteogenesis and angiogenesis in calcium phosphate ceramics

Overview of attention for article published in Trends in Biotechnology, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
411 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
372 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.
Title
Understanding of dopant-induced osteogenesis and angiogenesis in calcium phosphate ceramics
Published in
Trends in Biotechnology, September 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.06.005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susmita Bose, Gary Fielding, Solaiman Tarafder, Amit Bandyopadhyay

Abstract

General trends in synthetic bone grafting materials are shifting towards approaches that can illicit osteoinductive properties. Pharmacologics and biologics have been used in combination with calcium phosphate (CaP) ceramics, however, they have recently become the target of scrutiny over safety. The importance of trace elements in natural bone health is well documented. Ions, for example, lithium, zinc, magnesium, manganese, silicon, strontium, etc., have been shown to increase osteogenesis and neovascularization. Incorporation of dopants (trace metal ions) into CaPs can provide a platform for safe and efficient delivery in clinical applications where increased bone healing is favorable. This review highlights the use of trace elements in CaP biomaterials, and offers an insight into the mechanisms of how metal ions can enhance both osteogenesis and angiogenesis.

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 372 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 365 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 70 19%
Researcher 56 15%
Student > Master 54 15%
Student > Bachelor 34 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 5%
Other 52 14%
Unknown 86 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Materials Science 79 21%
Engineering 51 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 6%
Other 49 13%
Unknown 110 30%
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 16 September 2013.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Biotechnology
#2,746
of 2,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,006
of 209,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Biotechnology
#11
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 209,242 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.