↓ Skip to main content

Biodegradable PEG-Based Amphiphilic Block Copolymers for Tissue Engineering Applications

Overview of attention for article published in ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
patent
3 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
124 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
167 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
Biodegradable PEG-Based Amphiphilic Block Copolymers for Tissue Engineering Applications
Published in
ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering, June 2015
DOI 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.5b00122
Pubmed ID
Authors

Artem B. Kutikov, Jie Song

Abstract

Biodegradable tissue engineering scaffolds have great potential for delivering cells/therapeutics and supporting tissue formation. Polyesters, the most extensively investigated biodegradable synthetic polymers, are not ideally suited for diverse tissue engineering applications due to limitations associated with their hydrophobicity. This review discusses the design and applications of amphiphilic block copolymer scaffolds integrating hydrophilic poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) blocks with hydrophobic polyesters. Specifically, we highlight how the addition of PEG results in striking changes to the physical properties (swelling, degradation, mechanical, handling) and biological performance (protein & cell adhesion) of the degradable synthetic scaffolds in vitro. We then perform a critical review of how these in vitro characteristics translate to the performance of biodegradable amphiphilic block copolymer-based scaffolds in the repair of a variety of tissues in vivo including bone, cartilage, skin, and spinal cord/nerve. We conclude the review with recommendations for future optimizations in amphiphilic block copolymer design and the need for better-controlled in vivo studies to reveal the true benefits of the amphiphilic synthetic tissue scaffolds.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 165 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 25%
Student > Master 27 16%
Researcher 23 14%
Student > Bachelor 13 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 5%
Other 19 11%
Unknown 34 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 44 26%
Materials Science 21 13%
Engineering 16 10%
Chemical Engineering 14 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 5%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 35 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 27 September 2022.
All research outputs
#7,175,751
of 23,414,653 outputs
Outputs from ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering
#435
of 1,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,744
of 268,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering
#8
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,414,653 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,350 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 268,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.