↓ Skip to main content

Effects of mechanical stimulation on the reprogramming of somatic cells into human-induced pluripotent stem cells

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, June 2017
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 (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Effects of mechanical stimulation on the reprogramming of somatic cells into human-induced pluripotent stem cells
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13287-017-0594-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Young Mi Kim, Yun Gyeong Kang, So Hee Park, Myung-Kwan Han, Jae Ho Kim, Ji Won Shin, Jung-Woog Shin

Abstract

Mechanical stimuli play important roles in the proliferation and differentiation of adult stem cells. However, few studies on their effects on induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) have been published. Human dermal fibroblasts were seeded onto flexible membrane-bottom plates, and infected with retrovirus expressing the four reprogramming factors OCT4, SOX2, KLF, and c-MYC (OSKM). The cells were subjected to equiaxial stretching (3% or 8% for 2, 4, or 7 days) and seeded on feeder cells (STO). The reprogramming into iPSCs was evaluated by the expression of pluripotent markers, in vitro differentiation into three germ layers, and teratoma formation. Equiaxial stretching enhanced reprogramming efficiency without affecting the viral transduction rate. iPSCs induced by transduction of four reprogramming factors and application of equiaxial stretching had characteristics typical of iPSCs in terms of pluripotency and differentiation potentials. This is the first study to show that mechanical stimuli can increase reprogramming efficiency. However, it did not enhance the infection rate, indicating that mechanical stimuli, defined as stretching in this study, have positive effects on reprogramming rather than on infection. Additional studies should evaluate the mechanism underlying the modulation of reprogramming of somatic cells into iPSCs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 19%
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Other 6 17%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 14%
Engineering 4 11%
Chemistry 2 6%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 8 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#3,820,585
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#357
of 2,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,889
of 317,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#9
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,428 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 317,335 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.