| Title |
Characteristics of hematopoietic stem cells of umbilical cord blood
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Methods in Cell Science, November 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10616-014-9796-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Hordyjewska, Łukasz Popiołek, Anna Horecka |
| Abstract |
Umbilical cord blood collected from the postpartum placenta and cord is a rich source of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) and is an alternative to bone marrow transplantation. In this review we wanted to describe the differences (in phenotype, cytokine production, quantity and quality of cells) between stem cells from umbilical cord blood, bone marrow and peripheral blood. HSCs present in cord blood are more primitive than their counterparts in bone marrow or peripheral blood, and have several advantages including high proliferation. With using proper cytokine combination, HSCs can be effectively developed into different cell lines. This process is used in medicine, especially in hematology. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 202 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 17% |
| Researcher | 26 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 13% |
| Other | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 29 | 14% |
| Unknown | 44 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 46 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 34 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 19 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 26 | 13% |
| Unknown | 51 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 November 2014.
All research outputs
#14,913,921
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Methods in Cell Science
#750
of 1,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,982
of 276,316 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in Cell Science
#9
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,026 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 276,316 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 59% of its contemporaries.