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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Acute CD47 Blockade During Ischemic Myocardial Reperfusion Enhances Phagocytosis-Associated Cardiac Repair
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
JACC: Basic to Translational Science, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jacbts.2017.03.013 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shuang Zhang, Xin-Yi Yeap, Matthew DeBerge, Nivedita K. Naresh, Kevin Wang, Zhengxin Jiang, Jane E. Wilcox, Steven M. White, John P. Morrow, Paul W. Burridge, Daniel Procissi, Evan A. Scott, William Frazier, Edward B. Thorp |
| Abstract |
Our data suggest that, after a myocardial infarction, integrin-associated protein CD47 on cardiac myocytes is elevated. In culture, increased CD47 on the surface of dying cardiomyocytes impairs phagocytic removal by immune cell macrophages. After myocardial ischemia and reperfusion, acute CD47 inhibition with blocking antibodies enhanced dead myocyte clearance by cardiac phagocytes and also improved the resolution of cardiac inflammation, reduced infarct size, and preserved cardiac contractile function. Early targeting of CD47 in the myocardium after reperfusion may be a new strategy to enhance wound repair in the ischemic heart. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 29% |
| Croatia | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 64% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 11 | 79% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 19% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 17% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 18 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,145,353
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from JACC: Basic to Translational Science
#190
of 799 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,206
of 324,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC: Basic to Translational Science
#4
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 799 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 324,143 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 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 73% of its contemporaries.