↓ Skip to main content

Adapting extracellular matrix proteomics for clinical studies on cardiac remodeling post-myocardial infarction

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Proteomics, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
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
Adapting extracellular matrix proteomics for clinical studies on cardiac remodeling post-myocardial infarction
Published in
Clinical Proteomics, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12014-016-9120-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Merry L. Lindsey, Michael E. Hall, Romain Harmancey, Yonggang Ma

Abstract

Following myocardial infarction (MI), the left ventricle (LV) undergoes a series of cardiac wound healing responses that involve stimulation of robust inflammation to clear necrotic myocytes and tissue debris and induction of extracellular matrix (ECM) protein synthesis to generate a scar. Proteomic strategies provide us with a means to index the ECM proteins expressed in the LV, quantify amounts, determine functions, and explore interactions. This review will focus on the efforts taken in the proteomics research field that have expanded our understanding of post-MI LV remodeling, concentrating on the strengths and limitations of different proteomic approaches to glean information that is specific to ECM turnover in the post-MI setting. We will discuss how recent advances in sample preparation and labeling protocols increase our successes at detecting components of the cardiac ECM proteome. We will summarize how proteomic approaches, focusing on the ECM compartment, have progressed over time to current gel-free methods using decellularized fractions or labeling strategies that will be useful for clinical applications. This review will provide an overview of how cardiac ECM proteomics has evolved over the last decade and will provide insight into future directions that will drive forward our understanding of cardiac ECM turnover in the post-MI LV.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 19%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Professor 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 6 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Engineering 5 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 5 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 February 2017.
All research outputs
#7,203,630
of 12,480,234 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Proteomics
#72
of 156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,831
of 262,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Proteomics
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,480,234 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 156 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 262,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.