↓ Skip to main content

Chondrogenic progenitor cells respond to cartilage injury

Overview of attention for article published in Arthritis and rheumatism, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
202 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Chondrogenic progenitor cells respond to cartilage injury
Published in
Arthritis and rheumatism, October 2012
DOI 10.1002/art.34613
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Hypocellularity resulting from chondrocyte death in the aftermath of mechanical injury is thought to contribute to posttraumatic osteoarthritis. However, we observed that nonviable areas in cartilage injured by blunt impact were repopulated within 7-14 days by cells that appeared to migrate from the surrounding matrix. The aim of this study was to assess our hypothesis that the migrating cell population included chondrogenic progenitor cells that were drawn to injured cartilage by alarmins.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 196 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 19%
Student > Master 33 16%
Researcher 30 15%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 29 14%
Unknown 38 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 13%
Engineering 14 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 3%
Other 25 12%
Unknown 48 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,709,241
of 34,359,530 outputs
Outputs from Arthritis and rheumatism
#685
of 7,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,897
of 244,679 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Arthritis and rheumatism
#13
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,359,530 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 244,679 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.