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 |
Human Umbilical Cord Blood Cell Transplantation in Neuroregenerative Strategies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2017.00628 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luisa R. Galieva, Yana O. Mukhamedshina, Svetlana S. Arkhipova, Albert A. Rizvanov |
| Abstract |
At present there is no effective treatment of pathologies associated with the death of neurons and glial cells which take place as a result of physical trauma or ischemic lesions of the nervous system. Thus, researchers have high hopes for a treatment based on the use of stem cells (SC), which are potentially able to replace dead cells and synthesize neurotrophic factors and other molecules that stimulate neuroregeneration. We are often faced with ethical issues when selecting a source of SC. In addition to precluding these, human umbilical cord blood (hUCB) presents a number of advantages when compared with other sources of SC. In this review, we consider the key characteristics of hUCB, the results of various studies focused on the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis), ischemic (stroke) and traumatic injuries of the nervous system and the molecular mechanisms of hUCB-derived mononuclear and stem cells. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 | 4 | 27% |
| Argentina | 1 | 7% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 7% |
| Israel | 1 | 7% |
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| Dominican Republic | 1 | 7% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 53% |
| Scientists | 4 | 27% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 13% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 88 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 23% |
| Researcher | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 20% |
| Unknown | 22 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 11 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,745,370
of 25,138,857 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#1,171
of 19,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,545
of 321,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#15
of 258 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,138,857 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 321,825 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 258 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.