↓ Skip to main content

Olfactory Ensheathing Cells: Characteristics, Genetic Engineering, and Therapeutic Potential

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurotrauma, April 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
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.
Title
Olfactory Ensheathing Cells: Characteristics, Genetic Engineering, and Therapeutic Potential
Published in
Journal of Neurotrauma, April 2006
DOI 10.1089/neu.2006.23.468
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marc J. Ruitenberg, Jana Vukovic, Julijana Sarich, Samantha J. Busfield, Giles W. Plant

Abstract

Injured neurons in the mammalian central nervous system (CNS) do not normally regenerate their axons after injury. Neurotrauma to the CNS usually results in axonal damage and subsequent loss of communication between neuronal networks, causing long-term functional deficits. For CNS regeneration, repair strategies need to be developed that promote regrowth of lesioned axon projections and restoration of neuronal connectivity. After spinal cord injury (SCI), cystic cavitations are often found, particularly in the later stages, due to the loss of neural tissue at the original impact site. Ultimately, for the promotion of axonal regrowth in these situations, some form of transplantation will be required to provide lesioned axons with a supportive substrate along which they can extend. Here, we review the use of olfactory ensheathing cells: their location and role in the olfactory system, their use as cellular transplants in SCI paradigms, alone or in combination with gene therapy, and the unique properties of these cells that may give them a potential advantage over other cellular transplants.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 5%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 41 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 11%
Other 3 7%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 6 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 25%
Neuroscience 11 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 7 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 March 2015.
All research outputs
#2,459,671
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurotrauma
#314
of 2,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,940
of 66,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurotrauma
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 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 2,589 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 66,727 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 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.