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 |
Potency of umbilical cord blood- and Wharton’s jelly-derived mesenchymal stem cells for scarless wound healing
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep18844 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hanako Doi, Yuriko Kitajima, Lan Luo, Chan Yan, Seiko Tateishi, Yusuke Ono, Yoshishige Urata, Shinji Goto, Ryoichi Mori, Hideaki Masuzaki, Isao Shimokawa, Akiyoshi Hirano, Tao-Sheng Li |
| Abstract |
Postnatally, scars occur as a consequence of cutaneous wound healing. Scarless wound healing is highly desired for patients who have undergone surgery or trauma, especially to exposed areas. Based on the properties of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) for tissue repair and immunomodulation, we investigated the potential of MSCs for scarless wound healing. MSCs were expanded from umbilical cord blood (UCB-MSCs) and Wharton's jelly (WJ-MSCs) from healthy donors who underwent elective full-term pregnancy caesarean sections. UCB-MSCs expressed lower levels of the pre-inflammatory cytokines IL1A and IL1B, but higher levels of the extracellular matrix (ECM)-degradation enzymes MMP1 and PLAU compared with WJ-MSCs, suggesting that UCB-MSCs were more likely to favor scarless wound healing. However, we failed to find significant benefits for stem cell therapy in improving wound healing and reducing collagen deposition following the direct injection of 1.0 × 10(5) UCB-MSCs and WJ-MSCs into 5 mm full-thickness skin defect sites in nude mice. Interestingly, the implantation of UCB-MSCs tended to increase the expression of MMP2 and PLAU, two proteases involved in degradation of the extracellular matrix in the wound tissues. Based on our data, UCB-MSCs are more likely to be a favorable potential stem cell source for scarless wound healing, although a better experimental model is required for confirmation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 | 2 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 14% |
| Mexico | 1 | 7% |
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 71% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 18% |
| Researcher | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 22 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 15% |
| Engineering | 6 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 30 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 03 September 2020.
All research outputs
#2,783,868
of 25,059,640 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#24,211
of 137,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,624
of 405,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#555
of 3,124 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,059,640 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 137,580 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 405,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,124 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.