| Title |
Shen-Jing as a Chinese Medicine Concept Might Be a Counterpart of Stem Cells in Regenerative Medicine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11655-015-2136-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yan-bo Ren, Jian-hua Huang, Wai-jiao Cai, Zi-yin Shen |
| Abstract |
As the epitome of the modern regenerative medicine, stem cells were proposed in the basic sense no more than 200 years ago. However, the concept of "stem cells" existed long before the modern medical description. The hypothesis that all things, including our sentient body, were generated from a small origin was shared between Western and Chinese people. The ancient Chinese philosophers considered Jing (also known as essence) as the origin of life. In Chinese medicine (CM), Jing is mainly stored in Kidney (Shen) and the so-called Shen-Jing (Kidney essence). Here, we propose that Shen-Jing is the CM term used to express the meaning of "origin and regeneration". This theoretical discovery has at least two applications. First, the actions underlying causing Shen-Jing deficiency, such as excess sexual intercourse, chronic diseases, and aging, might damage the function of stem cells. Second, a large number of Chinese herbs with Shen-Jing-nourishing efficacy had been proven to affect stem cell proliferation and differentiation. Therefore, if Shen-Jing in CM is equivalent with stem cells in regenerative medicine, higher effective modulators for regulating stem-cell behaviors from Kidney-tonifying herbs would be expected. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 50% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 31% |
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Librarian | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 31% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 15% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 8% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 27 August 2020.
All research outputs
#5,590,868
of 22,849,304 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#106
of 677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,829
of 262,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
#4
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,849,304 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 677 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 262,793 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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.