↓ Skip to main content

3D Printing of Octacalcium Phosphate Bone Substitutes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
3D Printing of Octacalcium Phosphate Bone Substitutes
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00081
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vladimir S. Komlev, Vladimir K. Popov, Anton V. Mironov, Alexander Yu. Fedotov, Anastasia Yu. Teterina, Igor V. Smirnov, Ilya Y. Bozo, Vera A. Rybko, Roman V. Deev

Abstract

Biocompatible calcium phosphate ceramic grafts are able of supporting new bone formation in appropriate environment. The major limitation of these materials usage for medical implants is the absence of accessible methods for their patient-specific fabrication. 3D printing methodology is an excellent approach to overcome the limitation supporting effective and fast fabrication of individual complex bone substitutes. Here, we proposed a relatively simple route for 3D printing of octacalcium phosphates (OCP) in complexly shaped structures by the combination of inkjet printing with post-treatment methodology. The printed OCP blocks were further implanted in the developed cranial bone defect followed by histological evaluation. The obtained result confirmed the potential of the developed OCP bone substitutes, which allowed 2.5-time reducing of defect's diameter at 6.5 months in a region where native bone repair is extremely inefficient.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Researcher 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 24 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 14%
Materials Science 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Chemistry 6 6%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 28 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 25 June 2015.
All research outputs
#7,149,102
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#1,117
of 8,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,437
of 280,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#11
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,503 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 280,059 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.