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 |
Solid organ fabrication: comparison of decellularization to 3D bioprinting
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomaterials Research, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40824-016-0074-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jangwook P. Jung, Didarul B. Bhuiyan, Brenda M. Ogle |
| Abstract |
Solid organ fabrication is an ultimate goal of Regenerative Medicine. Since the introduction of Tissue Engineering in 1993, functional biomaterials, stem cells, tunable microenvironments, and high-resolution imaging technologies have significantly advanced efforts to regenerate in vitro culture or tissue platforms. Relatively simple flat or tubular organs are already in (pre)clinical trials and a few commercial products are in market. The road to more complex, high demand, solid organs including heart, kidney and lung will require substantive technical advancement. Here, we consider two emerging technologies for solid organ fabrication. One is decellularization of cadaveric organs followed by repopulation with terminally differentiated or progenitor cells. The other is 3D bioprinting to deposit cell-laden bio-inks to attain complex tissue architecture. We reviewed the development and evolution of the two technologies and evaluated relative strengths needed to produce solid organs, with special emphasis on the heart and other tissues of the cardiovascular system. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 232 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 42 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 38 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 15% |
| Researcher | 28 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 11% |
| Unknown | 53 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 40 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 36 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 31 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 11% |
| Materials Science | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 31 | 13% |
| Unknown | 62 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 21 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,443,449
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Biomaterials Research
#17
of 197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,286
of 348,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomaterials Research
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 348,502 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 88% of its contemporaries.
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 5 of them.