↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Ceramic Scaffold Architectural Parameters on Biological Response

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Effect of Ceramic Scaffold Architectural Parameters on Biological Response
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, October 2015
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00151
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Isabella Gariboldi, Serena M. Best

Abstract

Numerous studies have focused on the optimization of ceramic architectures to fulfill a variety of scaffold functional requirements and improve biological response. Conventional fabrication techniques, however, do not allow for the production of geometrically controlled, reproducible structures and often fail to allow the independent variation of individual geometric parameters. Current developments in additive manufacturing technologies suggest that 3D printing will allow a more controlled and systematic exploration of scaffold architectures. This more direct translation of design into structure requires a pipeline for design-driven optimization. A theoretical framework for systematic design and evaluation of architectural parameters on biological response is presented. Four levels of architecture are considered, namely (1) surface topography, (2) pore size and geometry, (3) porous networks, and (4) macroscopic pore arrangement, including the potential for spatially varied architectures. Studies exploring the effect of various parameters within these levels are reviewed. This framework will hopefully allow uncovering of new relationships between architecture and biological response in a more systematic way as well as inform future refinement of fabrication techniques to fulfill architectural necessities with a consideration of biological implications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 <1%
Unknown 134 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 21%
Student > Master 24 18%
Researcher 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 27 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 36 27%
Materials Science 26 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 7%
Chemistry 6 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 46 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#18,812,604
of 23,314,015 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#3,531
of 6,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,985
of 279,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#43
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,314,015 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 6,960 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 279,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.