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 |
The role and potential of umbilical cord blood in an era of new therapies: a review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13287-015-0113-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Santiago Roura, Josep-Maria Pujal, Carolina Gálvez-Montón, Antoni Bayes-Genis |
| Abstract |
In light of pioneering findings in the 1980s and an estimation of more than 130 million global annual births, umbilical cord blood (UCB) is considered to be the most plentiful reservoir of cells and to have regenerative potential for many clinical applications. Although UCB is used mainly against blood disorders, the spectrum of diseases for which it provides effective therapy has been expanded to include non-hematopoietic conditions; UCB has also been used as source for regenerative cell therapy and immune modulation. Thus, collection and banking of UCB-derived cells have become a popular option. However, there are questions regarding the cost versus the benefits of UCB banking, and it also raises complex ethical and legal issues. This review discusses many issues surrounding the conservation of UCB-derived cells and the great potential and current clinical applications of UCB in an era of new therapies. In particular, we describe the practical issues inherent in UCB collection, processing, and long-term storage as well as the different types of 'stem' or progenitor cells circulating in UCB and their uses in multiple clinical settings. Given these considerations, the trend toward UCB will continue to provide growing assistance to health care worldwide. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 224 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 40 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 38 | 17% |
| Researcher | 30 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 8% |
| Other | 34 | 15% |
| Unknown | 49 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 53 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 37 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 33 | 15% |
| Unknown | 61 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 36. 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 07 July 2023.
All research outputs
#991,758
of 23,454,152 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#45
of 2,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,780
of 264,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,454,152 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,468 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 264,846 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 97% of its contemporaries.