↓ Skip to main content

Nanoparticles for Tendon Healing and Regeneration: Literature Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Nanoparticles for Tendon Healing and Regeneration: Literature Review
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, August 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00202
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paolo D. Parchi, Orazio Vittorio, Lorenzo Andreani, Pietro Battistini, Nicola Piolanti, Stefano Marchetti, Andrea Poggetti, Michele Lisanti

Abstract

Tendon injuries are commonly met in the emergency department. Unfortunately, tendon tissue has limited regeneration potential and usually the consequent formation of scar tissue causes inferior mechanical properties. Nanoparticles could be used in different way to improve tendon healing and regeneration, ranging from scaffolds manufacturing (increasing the strength and endurance or anti-adhesions, anti-microbial, and anti-inflammatory properties) to gene therapy. This paper aims to summarize the most relevant studies showing the potential application of nanoparticles for tendon tissue regeneration.

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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 18 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 8 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Materials Science 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 20 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 22 September 2021.
All research outputs
#4,482,738
of 22,883,326 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,192
of 4,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,801
of 343,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#26
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,883,326 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 343,744 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.