↓ Skip to main content

Transplantation of UC-MSCs on collagen scaffold activates follicles in dormant ovaries of POF patients with long history of infertility

Overview of attention for article published in Science China Life Sciences, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
130 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Transplantation of UC-MSCs on collagen scaffold activates follicles in dormant ovaries of POF patients with long history of infertility
Published in
Science China Life Sciences, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11427-017-9272-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lijun Ding, Guijun Yan, Bin Wang, Lu Xu, Yan Gu, Tong Ru, Xiaoying Cui, Lei Lei, Jingyu Liu, Xiaoqiang Sheng, Bin Wang, Chunxue Zhang, Yanjun Yang, Ruiwei Jiang, Jianjun Zhou, Na Kong, Feifei Lu, Huaijun Zhou, Yannan Zhao, Bing Chen, Yali Hu, Jianwu Dai, Haixiang Sun

Abstract

Premature ovarian failure (POF) is a refractory disease for clinical treatment with the goal of restoring fertility. In this study, umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells on a collagen scaffold (collagen/UC-MSCs) can activate primordial follicles in vitro via phosphorylation of FOXO3a and FOXO1. Transplantation of collagen/UC-MSCs to the ovaries of POF patients rescued overall ovarian function, evidenced by elevated estradiol concentrations, improved follicular development, and increased number of antral follicles. Successful clinical pregnancy was achieved in women with POF after transplantation of collagen/UC-MSCs or UC-MSCs. In summary, collagen/UC-MSC transplantation may provide an effective treatment for POF.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 15%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 8 7%
Other 5 5%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 47 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Chemical Engineering 2 2%
Materials Science 2 2%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 53 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 19 September 2023.
All research outputs
#3,508,601
of 25,013,816 outputs
Outputs from Science China Life Sciences
#186
of 1,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,416
of 339,354 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science China Life Sciences
#2
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,013,816 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,110 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 339,354 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 95% of its contemporaries.