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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Treatment of experimental necrotizing enterocolitis with stem cell-derived exosomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Pediatric Surgery (Science Direct), March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2018.02.086 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Christopher J McCulloh, Jacob K Olson, Yijie Wang, Yu Zhou, Natalie Huibregtse Tengberg, Shivani Deshpande, Gail E Besner |
| Abstract |
Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) remains a devastating disease in premature infants. We previously showed that four stem cell (SC) types equivalently improve experimental NEC. Exosomes are intercellular nanovesicles containing RNA, miRNA, DNA, and protein. Because SC therapy faces challenges, our aim was to determine if the beneficial effects of SC are achievable with cell-free exosomes. Exosomes from four SC types were compared: (1) amniotic fluid-derived mesenchymal SC (AF-MSC); (2) bone marrow-derived MSC (BM-MSC); (3) amniotic fluid-derived neural SC (AF-NSC); and (4) neonatal enteric NSC (E-NSC). Rat pups exposed to NEC received a varying concentration of a single type of exosome with control pups receiving PBS only. Intestinal damage was graded histologically. The incidence of NEC was 0% in unstressed pups and 60.7% in control pups subjected to NEC. Exosomes (4.0×108) reduced NEC incidence to: AF-MSC 25.0%; BM-MSC 23.1%; AF-NSC 11.1%; E-NSC 27.3%. When administered at a concentration of at least 4.0×108, all groups demonstrated a significant reduction in NEC compared to untreated pups. At this minimum concentration, there was no difference in treatment efficacy between exosomes and the SC from which they were derived. Stem cell-derived exosomes reduce the incidence and severity of experimental NEC as effectively as the stem cells from which they are derived, supporting the potential for novel cell-free exosome therapy for NEC. Basic science. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 77 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 35 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 40 | 52% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 59. 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 03 February 2021.
All research outputs
#714,723
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pediatric Surgery (Science Direct)
#18
of 4,585 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,515
of 351,830 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pediatric Surgery (Science Direct)
#1
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,585 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 351,830 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 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 98% of its contemporaries.