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 |
Directed In Vitro Myogenesis of Human Embryonic Stem Cells and Their In Vivo Engraftment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0072023 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yongsung Hwang, Samuel Suk, Susan Lin, Matthew Tierney, Bin Du, Timothy Seo, Aaron Mitchell, Alessandra Sacco, Shyni Varghese |
| Abstract |
Development of human embryonic stem cell (hESC)-based therapy requires derivation of in vitro expandable cell populations that can readily differentiate to specified cell types and engraft upon transplantation. Here, we report that hESCs can differentiate into skeletal muscle cells without genetic manipulation. This is achieved through the isolation of cells expressing a mesodermal marker, platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRA), following embryoid body (EB) formation. The ESC-derived cells differentiated into myoblasts in vitro as evident by upregulation of various myogenic genes, irrespective of the presence of serum in the medium. This result is further corroborated by the presence of sarcomeric myosin and desmin, markers for terminally differentiated cells. When transplanted in vivo, these pre-myogenically committed cells were viable in tibialis anterior muscles 14 days post-implantation. These hESC-derived cells, which readily undergo myogenic differentiation in culture medium containing serum, could be a viable cell source for skeletal muscle repair and tissue engineering to ameliorate various muscle wasting diseases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Norway | 1 | 25% |
| France | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 11 | 19% |
| Unknown | 5 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 41% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 16% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 12% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 16 April 2019.
All research outputs
#2,347,577
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#29,931
of 193,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,580
of 198,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#765
of 4,673 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,928 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. 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 198,412 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,673 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.