↓ Skip to main content

Urine-derived cells for human cell therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Urine-derived cells for human cell therapy
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13287-018-0932-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nimshitha Pavathuparambil Abdul Manaph, Mohammed Al-Hawwas, Larisa Bobrovskaya, Patrick T. Coates, Xin-Fu Zhou

Abstract

Desirable cells for human cell therapy would be ones that can be generated by simple isolation and culture techniques using a donor sample obtained by non-invasive methods. To date, the different donor-specific cells that can be isolated from blood, skin, and hair require invasive methods for sample isolation and incorporate complex and costly reagents to culture. These cells also take considerable time for their in-vitro isolation and expansion. Previous studies suggest that donor-derived cells, namely urine stem cells and renal cells, may be isolated from human urine samples using a cost-effective and simple method of isolation, incorporating not such complex reagents. Moreover, the isolated cells, particularly urine stem cells, are superior to conventional stem cell sources in terms of favourable gene profile and inherent multipotent potential. Transdifferentiation or differentiation of human urine-derived cells can generate desirable cells for regenerative therapy. In this review, we intended to discuss the characteristics and therapeutic applications of urine-derived cells for human cell therapy. Conclusively, with detailed study and optimisation, urine-derived cells have a prospective future to generate functional lineage-specific cells for patients from a clinical translation point of view.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 23%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 16 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 16 36%

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 08 April 2020.
All research outputs
#4,718,613
of 15,549,197 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#441
of 1,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,425
of 223,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,549,197 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,462 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 223,791 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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