↓ Skip to main content

Earlier effect of alendronate in mouse metaphyseal versus diaphyseal bone healing

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Research, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Earlier effect of alendronate in mouse metaphyseal versus diaphyseal bone healing
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Research, June 2016
DOI 10.1002/jor.23316
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olof Sandberg, Magnus Bernhardsson, Per Aspenberg

Abstract

Healing of injured cancellous bone is characterized by a transient stage of rapid bone formation throughout the traumatized bone volume, often followed by similarly rapid resorption. This is different from the slower diaphyseal healing via an external callus. We therefore hypothesized that antiresorptive treatment might have an earlier positive effects in cancellous bone healing than in diaphyseal fractures. 123 male C57bl6 mice received either an internally stabilized diaphyseal osteotomy of the femur or a screw inserted into the tibial metaphysis. The mice were randomized to daily alendronate injections (200 ug/kg/day), or control injections, and killed for mechanical testing after 14, 21, or 28 days. The hypothesis was tested by a 3-way Anova (time, site, and drug). The ultimate force was increased by bisphosphonate treatment in both models. There was a significant interaction between time, site and drug (p < 0.001) so that the full positive effect of alendronate was evident in the metaphysis at 14 days, but first after 28 days in the diaphysis. While the early effect in the metaphysis might be translated into earlier healing, the late effect in the diaphysis was due to delayed remodeling of the callus, which might have less clinical importance. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 31%
Student > Postgraduate 3 19%
Student > Master 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Unknown 4 25%
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 09 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Research
#3,014
of 3,625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,111
of 367,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Research
#37
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 3,625 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 367,844 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.