↓ Skip to main content

Physiological Effects of Microgravity on Bone Cells

Overview of attention for article published in Calcified Tissue International, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
Title
Physiological Effects of Microgravity on Bone Cells
Published in
Calcified Tissue International, April 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00223-014-9851-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yasir Arfat, Wei-Zhong Xiao, Salman Iftikhar, Fan Zhao, Di-Jie Li, Yu-Long Sun, Ge Zhang, Peng Shang, Ai-Rong Qian

Abstract

Life on Earth developed under the influence of normal gravity (1g). With evidence from previous studies, scientists have suggested that normal physiological processes, such as the functional integrity of muscles and bone mass, can be affected by microgravity during spaceflight. During the life span, bone not only develops as a structure designed specifically for mechanical tasks but also adapts for efficiency. The lack of weight-bearing forces makes microgravity an ideal physical stimulus to evaluate bone cell responses. One of the most serious problems induced by long-term weightlessness is bone mineral loss. Results from in vitro studies that entailed the use of bone cells in spaceflights showed modification in cell attachment structures and cytoskeletal reorganization, which may be involved in bone loss. Humans exposed to microgravity conditions experience various physiological changes, including loss of bone mass, muscle deterioration, and immunodeficiency. In vitro models can be used to extract valuable information about changes in mechanical stress to ultimately identify the different pathways of mechanotransduction in bone cells. Despite many in vivo and in vitro studies under both real microgravity and simulated conditions, the mechanism of bone loss is still not well defined. The objective of this review is to summarize the recent research on bone cells under microgravity conditions based on advances in the field.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 92 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Student > Master 14 15%
Researcher 5 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 21 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 11%
Engineering 8 9%
Neuroscience 5 5%
Other 25 27%
Unknown 23 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 05 May 2014.
All research outputs
#18,223,029
of 23,400,864 outputs
Outputs from Calcified Tissue International
#1,463
of 1,796 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,972
of 227,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Calcified Tissue International
#79
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,400,864 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 1,796 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 227,573 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.