| Title |
CXCL1 and CXCR2 as potential markers for vital reactions in skin contusions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12024-018-9969-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jie-Tao He, Hong-Yan Huang, Dong Qu, Ye Xue, Kai-kai Zhang, Xiao-Li Xie, Qi Wang |
| Abstract |
Detection of the vitality of wounds is one of the most important issues in forensic practice. This study investigated mRNA and protein levels of CXCL1 and CXCR2 in skin wounds in mice and humans. Western blot analysis of CXCL1 and CXCR2 protein levels showed no difference between wounded and intact skin. However, mRNA levels demonstrated higher expression of CXCL1 and CXCR2 in contused mouse and human skin, compared with intact skin. At postmortem there were no remarkable changes in CXCL1 and CXCR2 mRNA levels in contused mouse skin. Increased mRNA expression was observed in contused mouse skin up to 96 h and 72 h after death for CXCL1 and CXCR2 respectively. In human samples of wounded skin, increased CXCL1 mRNA levels were detected up to 48 h after autopsy in all 5 cases, while increased CXCR2 mRNA levels were observed 48 h after autopsy in 4 of 5 cases. These findings suggest that the levels of CXCL1 and CXCR2 mRNA present in contused skin can be used as potential markers for a vital reaction in forensic practice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 18 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Librarian | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 61% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 56% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 April 2018.
All research outputs
#16,454,538
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#407
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#213,684
of 332,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
#10
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 332,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.