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 |
A Review of Cellularization Strategies for Tissue Engineering of Whole Organs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00043 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michelle E. Scarritt, Nicholas C. Pashos, Bruce A. Bunnell |
| Abstract |
With the advent of whole organ decellularization, extracellular matrix scaffolds suitable for organ engineering were generated from numerous tissues, including the heart, lung, liver, kidney, and pancreas, for use as alternatives to traditional organ transplantation. Biomedical researchers now face the challenge of adequately and efficiently recellularizing these organ scaffolds. Herein, an overview of whole organ decellularization and a thorough review of the current literature for whole organ recellularization are presented. The cell types, delivery methods, and bioreactors employed for recellularization are discussed along with commercial and clinical considerations, such as immunogenicity, biocompatibility, and Food and Drug Administartion regulation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 403 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 397 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 69 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 65 | 16% |
| Researcher | 63 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 50 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 27 | 7% |
| Other | 49 | 12% |
| Unknown | 80 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 68 | 17% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 61 | 15% |
| Engineering | 58 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 51 | 13% |
| Materials Science | 16 | 4% |
| Other | 48 | 12% |
| Unknown | 101 | 25% |
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 09 December 2019.
All research outputs
#2,388,887
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#286
of 6,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,687
of 353,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#5
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,524 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 353,059 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.