↓ Skip to main content

Physiology of Mechanotransduction: How Do Muscle and Bone “Talk” to One Another?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical & Translational Metabolism, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 120)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Physiology of Mechanotransduction: How Do Muscle and Bone “Talk” to One Another?
Published in
Clinical & Translational Metabolism, December 2013
DOI 10.1007/s12018-013-9152-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Janalee Isaacson, Marco Brotto

Abstract

The complexity of cell interactions with their microenvironment and their ability to communicate at the autocrine, paracrine, and endocrine levels has gradually but significantly evolved in the last three decades. The musculoskeletal system has been historically recognized to be governed by a relationship of proximity and function, chiefly dictated by mechanical forces and the work of gravity itself. In this review article, we first provide a historical overview of the biomechanical theory of bone- muscle interactions. Next, we expand to detail the significant evolution in our understanding of the function of bones and muscles as secretory organs. Then, we review and discuss new evidence in support of a biochemical interaction between these two tissues. We then propose that these two models of interaction are complementary and intertwined providing for a new frontier for the investigation of how bone-muscle cross talk could be fully explored for the targeting of new therapies for musculoskeletal diseases, particularly the twin conditions of aging, osteoporosis and sarcopenia. In the last section, we explore the bone-muscle cross talk in the context of their interactions with other tissues and the global impact of these multi-tissue interactions on chronic diseases.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 97 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 17%
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Other 24 24%
Unknown 19 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 9%
Engineering 7 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 23 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 07 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,985,390
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from Clinical & Translational Metabolism
#8
of 120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,098
of 321,742 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical & Translational Metabolism
#3
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 120 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 321,742 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.