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 |
Advancements in stem cells treatment of skeletal muscle wasting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2014.00048 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mirella Meregalli, Andrea Farini, Clementina Sitzia, Yvan Torrente |
| Abstract |
Muscular dystrophies (MDs) are a heterogeneous group of inherited disorders, in which progressive muscle wasting and weakness is often associated with exhaustion of muscle regeneration potential. Although physiological properties of skeletal muscle tissue are now well known, no treatments are effective for these diseases. Muscle regeneration was attempted by means transplantation of myogenic cells (from myoblast to embryonic stem cells) and also by interfering with the malignant processes that originate in pathological tissues, such as uncontrolled fibrosis and inflammation. Taking into account the advances in the isolation of new subpopulation of stem cells and in the creation of artificial stem cell niches, we discuss how these emerging technologies offer great promises for therapeutic approaches to muscle diseases and muscle wasting associated with aging. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| United States | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Norway | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Scientists | 3 | 43% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Russia | 1 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 63 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 24% |
| Researcher | 15 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 18% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 16% |
| Unknown | 3 | 4% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 13% |
| Engineering | 4 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 9 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 23 June 2016.
All research outputs
#1,816,390
of 23,340,595 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#989
of 14,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,852
of 308,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#11
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,340,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 308,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 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 90% of its contemporaries.