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 |
3D Bioprinting of Cartilage for Orthopedic Surgeons: Reading between the Lines
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Surgery, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fsurg.2015.00039 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Claudia Di Bella, Amanda Fosang, Davide M. Donati, Gordon G. Wallace, Peter F. M. Choong |
| Abstract |
Chondral and osteochondral lesions represent one of the most challenging and frustrating scenarios for the orthopedic surgeon and for the patient. The lack of therapeutic strategies capable to reconstitute the function and structure of hyaline cartilage and to halt the progression toward osteoarthritis has brought clinicians and scientists together, to investigate the potential role of tissue engineering as a viable alternative to current treatment modalities. In particular, the role of bioprinting is emerging as an innovative technology that allows for the creation of organized 3D tissue constructs via a "layer-by-layer" deposition process. This process also has the capability to combine cells and biomaterials in an ordered and predetermined way. Here, we review the recent advances in cartilage bioprinting and we identify the current challenges and the directions for future developments in cartilage regeneration. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 | 2 | 33% |
| Spain | 1 | 17% |
| Australia | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 252 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 251 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 52 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 52 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 27 | 11% |
| Researcher | 25 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 45 | 18% |
| Unknown | 39 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 66 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 29 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 10% |
| Materials Science | 20 | 8% |
| Other | 31 | 12% |
| Unknown | 56 | 22% |
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 18 June 2018.
All research outputs
#4,710,240
of 23,322,966 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Surgery
#168
of 3,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,784
of 265,461 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Surgery
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,322,966 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,171 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 265,461 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 21 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 95% of its contemporaries.