↓ Skip to main content

Spinal Cord Injury Scarring and Inflammation: Therapies Targeting Glial and Inflammatory Responses

Overview of attention for article published in Neurotherapeutics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
387 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
237 Mendeley
Title
Spinal Cord Injury Scarring and Inflammation: Therapies Targeting Glial and Inflammatory Responses
Published in
Neurotherapeutics, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s13311-018-0631-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael B Orr, John C Gensel

Abstract

Deficits in neuronal function are a hallmark of spinal cord injury (SCI) and therapeutic efforts are often focused on central nervous system (CNS) axon regeneration. However, secondary injury responses by astrocytes, microglia, pericytes, endothelial cells, Schwann cells, fibroblasts, meningeal cells, and other glia not only potentiate SCI damage but also facilitate endogenous repair. Due to their profound impact on the progression of SCI, glial cells and modification of the glial scar are focuses of SCI therapeutic research. Within and around the glial scar, cells deposit extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins that affect axon growth such as chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans (CSPGs), laminin, collagen, and fibronectin. This dense deposition of material, i.e., the fibrotic scar, is another barrier to endogenous repair and is a target of SCI therapies. Infiltrating neutrophils and monocytes are recruited to the injury site through glial chemokine and cytokine release and subsequent upregulation of chemotactic cellular adhesion molecules and selectins on endothelial cells. These peripheral immune cells, along with endogenous microglia, drive a robust inflammatory response to injury with heterogeneous reparative and pathological properties and are targeted for therapeutic modification. Here, we review the role of glial and inflammatory cells after SCI and the therapeutic strategies that aim to replace, dampen, or alter their activity to modulate SCI scarring and inflammation and improve injury outcomes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 237 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 36 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 15%
Student > Master 21 9%
Researcher 20 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 6%
Other 28 12%
Unknown 82 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 50 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 3%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 87 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 29 July 2021.
All research outputs
#6,757,283
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Neurotherapeutics
#661
of 1,308 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,720
of 341,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neurotherapeutics
#11
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,308 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 341,606 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.