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 |
In vivo administration of dental epithelial stem cells at the apical end of the mouse incisor
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2015.00112 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Giovanna Orsini, Lucia Jimenez-Rojo, Despoina Natsiou, Angelo Putignano, Thimios A. Mitsiadis |
| Abstract |
Cell-based tissue regeneration is an attractive approach that complements traditional surgical techniques for replacement of injured and lost tissues. The continuously growing rodent incisor provides an excellent model system for investigating cellular and molecular mechanisms that underlie tooth renewal and regeneration. An active population of dental epithelial progenitor/stem cells located at the posterior part of the incisor, commonly called cervical loop area, ensures the continuous supply of cells that are responsible for the secretion of enamel matrix. To explore the potential of these epithelial cells in therapeutic approaches dealing with enamel defects, we have developed a new method for their in vivo administration in the posterior part of the incisor. Here, we provide the step-by-step protocol for the isolation of dental epithelial stem cells and their delivery at targeted areas of the jaw. This simple and yet powerful protocol, consisting in drilling a hole in the mandibular bone, in close proximity to the cervical loop area of the incisor, followed up by injection of stem cells, is feasible, reliable, and effective. This in vivo approach opens new horizons and possibilities for cellular therapies involving pathological and injured dental tissues. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 22% |
| Unknown | 3 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 52% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 22% |
| Design | 2 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 1 | 4% |
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 12 April 2015.
All research outputs
#17,752,946
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#7,127
of 13,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,970
of 264,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#56
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 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 13,562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 264,944 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.