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 |
Engineering Scalable Manufacturing of High-Quality Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes for Cardiac Tissue Repair
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Medicine, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmed.2018.00110 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kaitlin K. Dunn, Sean P. Palecek |
| Abstract |
Recent advances in the differentiation and production of human pluripotent stem cell (hPSC)-derived cardiomyocytes (CMs) have stimulated development of strategies to use these cells in human cardiac regenerative therapies. A prerequisite for clinical trials and translational implementation of hPSC-derived CMs is the ability to manufacture safe and potent cells on the scale needed to replace cells lost during heart disease. Current differentiation protocols generate fetal-like CMs that exhibit proarrhythmogenic potential. Sufficient maturation of these hPSC-derived CMs has yet to be achieved to allow these cells to be used as a regenerative medicine therapy. Insights into the native cardiac environment during heart development may enable engineering of strategies that guide hPSC-derived CMs to mature. Specifically, considerations must be made in regard to developing methods to incorporate the native intercellular interactions and biomechanical cues into hPSC-derived CM production that are conducive to scale-up. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 105 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 27% |
| Researcher | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 22 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 20% |
| Engineering | 20 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 14% |
| Chemical Engineering | 6 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 24 | 23% |
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 04 May 2018.
All research outputs
#17,947,156
of 23,045,021 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#3,696
of 5,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,907
of 326,487 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#84
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,045,021 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,807 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.3. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 326,487 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.