↓ Skip to main content

Exploring for the optimal structural design for the 3D-printing technology for cranial reconstruction: a biomechanical and histological study comparison of solid vs. porous structure

Overview of attention for article published in Child's Nervous System, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
Exploring for the optimal structural design for the 3D-printing technology for cranial reconstruction: a biomechanical and histological study comparison of solid vs. porous structure
Published in
Child's Nervous System, June 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00381-017-3486-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Young Lim, Namhyun Kim, Jong-Chul Park, Sun K. Yoo, Dong Ah Shin, Kyu-Won Shim

Abstract

Cranioplasty for recovering skull defects carries the risk for a number of complications. Various materials are used, including autologous bone graft, metallic materials, and non-metallic materials, each of which has advantages and disadvantages. If the use of autologous bone is not feasible, those artificial materials also have constraints in the case of complex anatomy and/or irregular defects. This study used metal 3D-printing technology to overcome these existing drawbacks and analyze the clinical and mechanical performance requirements. To find an optimal structure that satisfied the structural and mechanical stability requirements, we evaluated biomechanical stability using finite element analysis (FEA) and mechanical testing. To ensure clinical applicability, the model was subjected to histological evaluation. Each specimen was implanted in the femur of a rabbit and was evaluated using histological measurements and push-out test. We believe that our data will provide the basis for future applications of a variety of unit structures and further clinical trials and research, as well as the direction for the study of other patient-specific implants.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Master 6 13%
Other 5 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 14 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 21%
Engineering 7 15%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 19 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,941,384
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Child's Nervous System
#893
of 2,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,597
of 291,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child's Nervous System
#31
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,789 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 291,513 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.