↓ Skip to main content

Bridging the Divide between Neuroprosthetic Design, Tissue Engineering and Neurobiology

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroengineering, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
91 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
174 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Bridging the Divide between Neuroprosthetic Design, Tissue Engineering and Neurobiology
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroengineering, January 2010
DOI 10.3389/neuro.16.018.2009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennie B. Leach, Anil Kumar H. Achyuta, Shashi K. Murthy

Abstract

Neuroprosthetic devices have made a major impact in the treatment of a variety of disorders such as paralysis and stroke. However, a major impediment in the advancement of this technology is the challenge of maintaining device performance during chronic implantation (months to years) due to complex intrinsic host responses such as gliosis or glial scarring. The objective of this review is to bring together research communities in neurobiology, tissue engineering, and neuroprosthetics to address the major obstacles encountered in the translation of neuroprosthetics technology into long-term clinical use. This article draws connections between specific challenges faced by current neuroprosthetics technology and recent advances in the areas of nerve tissue engineering and neurobiology. Within the context of the device-nervous system interface and central nervous system implants, areas of synergistic opportunity are discussed, including platforms to present cells with multiple cues, controlled delivery of bioactive factors, three-dimensional constructs and in vitro models of gliosis and brain injury, nerve regeneration strategies, and neural stem/progenitor cell biology. Finally, recent insights gained from the fields of developmental neurobiology and cancer biology are discussed as examples of exciting new biological knowledge that may provide fresh inspiration toward novel technologies to address the complexities associated with long-term neuroprosthetic device performance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 174 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
Germany 4 2%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 160 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 30%
Researcher 32 18%
Student > Master 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 24 14%
Unknown 24 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 45 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 20%
Neuroscience 20 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 6%
Materials Science 8 5%
Other 26 15%
Unknown 31 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 January 2014.
All research outputs
#18,360,179
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroengineering
#61
of 82 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,167
of 163,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroengineering
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 82 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 163,719 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.