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 |
Enamel Matrix Derivative has No Effect on the Chondrogenic Differentiation of Mesenchymal Stem Cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fbioe.2014.00029 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisanne C. Groeneveldt, Callie Knuth, Janneke Witte-Bouma, Fergal J. O’Brien, Eppo B. Wolvius, Eric Farrell |
| Abstract |
Treatment of large bone defects due to trauma, tumor resection, or congenital abnormalities is challenging. Bone tissue engineering using mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) represents a promising treatment option. However, the quantity and quality of engineered bone tissue are not sufficient to fill large bone defects. The aim of this study was to determine if the addition of enamel matrix derivative (EMD) improves in vitro chondrogenic priming of MSCs to ultimately improve in vivo MSC mediated endochondral bone formation. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 27% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 20% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 1 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 53% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 20% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 1 | 7% |
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 02 September 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#4,051
of 8,501 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,727
of 248,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#15
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,501 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 248,616 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.