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 |
Restorative effects of human neural stem cell grafts on the primate spinal cord
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Medicine, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nm.4502 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ephron S Rosenzweig, John H Brock, Paul Lu, Hiromi Kumamaru, Ernesto A Salegio, Ken Kadoya, Janet L Weber, Justine J Liang, Rod Moseanko, Stephanie Hawbecker, J Russell Huie, Leif A Havton, Yvette S Nout-Lomas, Adam R Ferguson, Michael S Beattie, Jacqueline C Bresnahan, Mark H Tuszynski |
| Abstract |
We grafted human spinal cord-derived neural progenitor cells (NPCs) into sites of cervical spinal cord injury in rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). Under three-drug immunosuppression, grafts survived at least 9 months postinjury and expressed both neuronal and glial markers. Monkey axons regenerated into grafts and formed synapses. Hundreds of thousands of human axons extended out from grafts through monkey white matter and synapsed in distal gray matter. Grafts gradually matured over 9 months and improved forelimb function beginning several months after grafting. These findings in a 'preclinical trial' support translation of NPC graft therapy to humans with the objective of reconstituting both a neuronal and glial milieu in the site of spinal cord injury. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 108 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 20 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 13 | 12% |
| Japan | 6 | 6% |
| Australia | 5 | 5% |
| Brazil | 3 | 3% |
| Portugal | 3 | 3% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 41 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 84 | 78% |
| Scientists | 14 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 6% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 308 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 308 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 53 | 17% |
| Researcher | 53 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 31 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 7% |
| Other | 34 | 11% |
| Unknown | 83 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 59 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 42 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 31 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 9% |
| Engineering | 23 | 7% |
| Other | 27 | 9% |
| Unknown | 99 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 233. 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 28 December 2023.
All research outputs
#164,865
of 25,613,746 outputs
Outputs from Nature Medicine
#696
of 9,383 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,849
of 344,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Medicine
#9
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,613,746 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,383 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 105.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 344,524 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 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 87% of its contemporaries.