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 |
Are the precapillary sphincters and metarterioles universal components of the microcirculation? An historical review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Physiological Sciences, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12576-013-0274-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tatsuo Sakai, Yasue Hosoyamada |
| Abstract |
The microcirculation is a major topic in current physiology textbooks and is frequently explained with schematics including the precapillary sphincters and metarterioles. We re-evaluated the validity and applicability of the concepts precapillary sphincters and metarterioles by reviewing the historical context in which they were developed in physiology textbooks. The studies by Zweifach up until the 1950s revealed the unique features of the mesenteric microcirculation, illustrated with impressive schematics of the microcirculation with metarterioles and precapillary sphincters. Fulton, Guyton and other authors introduced or mimicked these schematics in their physiology textbooks as representative of the microcirculation in general. However, morphological and physiological studies have revealed that the microcirculation in the other organs and tissues contains no metarterioles or precapillary sphincters. The metarterioles and precapillary sphincters were not universal components of the microcirculation in general, but unique features of the mesenteric microcirculation. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Professor | 7 | 9% |
| Other | 13 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 29% |
| Engineering | 9 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 16 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 October 2023.
All research outputs
#7,967,425
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#85
of 321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#66,758
of 197,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 197,696 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.