↓ Skip to main content

Bone marrow aspirate concentrate for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus: a systematic review of outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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.
Title
Bone marrow aspirate concentrate for the treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus: a systematic review of outcomes
Published in
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40634-016-0069-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jorge Chahla, Mark E. Cinque, Jason M. Schon, Daniel J. Liechti, Lauren M. Matheny, Robert F. LaPrade, Thomas O. Clanton

Abstract

The goal of this perform a systematic review on the outcomes of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) for the treatment of chondral defects and osteoarthritis (OA) of the talus. The systematic search performed identified 47 studies after duplicates were removed. After inclusion criteria were applied four studies were considered for insightful analysis for the treatment of focal chondral defects in the foot and ankle with the use of BMAC. Three studies were retrospective and one study was prospective in nature. One study was a comparative cohort study and three studies were case series. This review denotes that there exists an overwhelming paucity of long-term data and high-level evidence supporting BMAC for the treatment of chondral defects. Nonetheless, the evidence available showed varying degrees of beneficial results of BMAC for the treatment of ankle cartilage defects. The limited literature presented in this review demonstrates the need for more advanced, comparative studies to further investigate the efficacy, safety and techniques for BMAC in the treatment of OLTs. The authors recommend that BMAC therapy should be performed with careful consideration until the application and target population for this treatment are established.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Austria 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 29%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Master 3 9%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 53%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 12%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Materials Science 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 26%

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 10 December 2018.
All research outputs
#3,439,318
of 14,009,143 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#21
of 86 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,503
of 288,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,009,143 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 86 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 288,586 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.