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 |
Comparative Study on the Therapeutic Potential of Neurally Differentiated Stem Cells in a Mouse Model of Multiple Sclerosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, April 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0035093 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalie L. Payne, Guizhi Sun, Daniella Herszfeld, Pollyanna A. Tat-Goh, Paul J. Verma, Helena C. Parkington, Harold A. Coleman, Mary A. Tonta, Christopher Siatskas, Claude C. A. Bernard |
| Abstract |
Transplantation of neural stem cells (NSCs) is a promising novel approach to the treatment of neuroinflammatory diseases such as multiple sclerosis (MS). NSCs can be derived from primary central nervous system (CNS) tissue or obtained by neural differentiation of embryonic stem (ES) cells, the latter having the advantage of readily providing an unlimited number of cells for therapeutic purposes. Using a mouse model of MS, we evaluated the therapeutic potential of NSCs derived from ES cells by two different neural differentiation protocols that utilized adherent culture conditions and compared their effect to primary NSCs derived from the subventricular zone (SVZ). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 55 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 19% |
| Researcher | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 34% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 8% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 April 2012.
All research outputs
#18,305,445
of 22,664,267 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,773
of 193,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,280
of 161,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,825
of 3,658 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,664,267 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,506 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 161,293 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,658 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.