The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Impaired fin regeneration and angiogenesis in aged zebrafish and turquoise killifish
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biology Open, April 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1242/bio.059622 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Johanna Örling, Katri Kosonen, Jenna Villman, Martin Reichard, Ilkka Paatero |
| Abstract |
Impaired wound healing is associated with aging and has significant effects on human health on an individual level, but also the whole health care sector. Deficient angiogenesis appears to be involved in the process, but the underlying biology is still poorly understood. This is at least partially being explained by complexity and costs in using mammalian aging models. To understand aging-related vascular biology of impaired wound healing, we have utilized zebrafish and turquoise killifish fin regeneration models. The regeneration of caudal fin after resection was significantly reduced in old individuals in both species. Age-related changes in angiogenesis, vascular density and expression levels of angiogenesis biomarker VEGF-A were observed. Furthermore, anti-angiogenic drug, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor blocking inhibitor SU5416 reduced regeneration indicating a key role for angiogenesis in the regeneration of aging caudal fin despite aging-related changes in vasculature. Taken together, our data indicates that these fish fin regeneration models are suitable for studying aging-related decline in wound healing and associated alterations in aging vasculature. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 2 | 33% |
| Uruguay | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 10 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 20% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 30 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,027,994
of 25,600,774 outputs
Outputs from Biology Open
#78
of 1,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,368
of 422,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Open
#4
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,600,774 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 1,780 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 422,302 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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 90% of its contemporaries.