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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Recombinant human collagen for tissue engineered corneal substitutes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Materials, March 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.11.011 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wenguang Liu, Kimberley Merrett, May Griffith, Per Fagerholm, Subhadra Dravida, Belinda Heyne, Juan C. Scaiano, Mitchell A. Watsky, Naoshi Shinozaki, Neil Lagali, Rejean Munger, Fengfu Li |
| Abstract |
We successfully fabricated transparent, robust hydrogels as corneal substitutes from concentrated recombinant human type I and type III collagen solutions crosslinked with 1-ethyl-3-(3-dimethyl aminopropyl) carbodiimide (EDC) and N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS). White light transmission through these gels is comparable or superior to that of human corneas. Hydrogels from both type I and type III collagens supported in vitro epithelium and nerve over-growth. While both these biocompatible hydrogels have adequate tensile strength and elasticity for surgical manipulation, type III collagen hydrogels tended to be mechanically superior. Twelve-month post-implantation results of type I recombinant collagen-based corneal substitutes into mini-pigs showed retention of optical clarity, along with regeneration of corneal cells, nerves and tear film. For clinical use, implants based on fully characterized, recombinant human collagen eliminate the risk of pathogen transfer or xenogeneic immuno-responses posed by animal collagens. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Czechia | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 186 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 45 | 23% |
| Researcher | 35 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 30 | 15% |
| Unknown | 31 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 34 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 9% |
| Materials Science | 16 | 8% |
| Other | 27 | 14% |
| Unknown | 41 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 April 2023.
All research outputs
#2,810,813
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Materials
#655
of 10,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,139
of 95,553 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Materials
#6
of 88 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 10,751 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. 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 95,553 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 88 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.