↓ Skip to main content
What is this page? Embed badge

Fetal stem cells

Overview of attention for article published in Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, December 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#19 of 789)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
18 tweeters
patent
25 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
210 Mendeley
Summary News Blogs Twitter Patents Facebook Google+ Dimensions citations
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
Fetal stem cells
Published in
Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, December 2004
DOI 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2004.06.010
Pubmed ID
15582543
Authors

Keelin O'Donoghue, Nicholas M. Fisk

Abstract

Fetal stem cells can be isolated from fetal blood and bone marrow as well as from other fetal tissues, including liver and kidney. Fetal blood is a rich source of haemopoietic stem cells (HSC), which proliferate more rapidly than those in cord blood or adult bone marrow. First trimester fetal blood also contains a population of non-haemopoietic mesenchymal stem cells (MSC), which support haemopoiesis and can differentiate along multiple lineages. In terms of eventual downstream application, both fetal HSC and MSC have advantages over their adult counterparts, including better intrinsic homing and engraftment, greater multipotentiality and lower immunogenicity. Fetal stem cells are less ethically contentious than embryonic stem cells and their differentiation potential appears greater than adult stem cells. Fetal stem cells represent powerful tools for exploring many aspects of cell biology and hold considerable promise as therapeutic tools for cell transplantation and ex vivo gene therapy.

View on publisher site

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 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 210 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 207 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 19%
Student > Bachelor 34 16%
Student > Master 32 15%
Researcher 31 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 4%
Other 23 11%
Unknown 43 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 45 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 39 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 18%
Unspecified 8 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 3%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 49 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 41. 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 18 January 2023.
All research outputs
#887,716
of 23,565,002 outputs
Outputs from Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#19
of 789 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,645
of 142,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,565,002 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 789 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 142,816 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them

This page is provided by Altmetric.