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 |
Mesenchymal Stem Cells for the Treatment of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Medicine, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmed.2018.00142 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Argyrios Tzouvelekis, Rebecca Toonkel, Theodoros Karampitsakos, Kantha Medapalli, Ioanna Ninou, Vasilis Aidinis, Demosthenes Bouros, Marilyn K. Glassberg |
| Abstract |
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is an inexorably progressive lung disease of unknown origin. Prognosis is poor, with limited treatment options available, and the median survival remains just 3-5 years. Despite the use of pirfenidone and nintedanib for the treatment of IPF, curative therapies remain elusive and mortality remains high. Regenerative medicine and the use of cell-based therapies has recently emerged as a potential option for various diseases. Promising results of preclinical studies using mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) suggest that they may represent a potential therapeutic option for the treatment of chronic lung diseases including IPF. Encouraging results of Phase 1 studies of MSCs various have reduced safety concerns. Nonetheless, there is still a pressing need for exploratory biomarkers and interval end-points in the context of MSCs investigation. This review intends to summarize the current state of knowledge for stem cells in the experimental and clinical setting of IPF, present important safety and efficacy issues, highlight future challenges and address the need for large, multicenter clinical trials coupled with realistic end-points, including biomarkers, to assess treatment efficacy. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Researcher | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 27 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 32 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 30 June 2021.
All research outputs
#13,597,712
of 23,053,613 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#2,161
of 5,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,080
of 326,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#52
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,613 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,817 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 326,931 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.