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 |
Human neural stem cell transplantation in spinal cord injury models: how far from clinical application?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/scrt210 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Isaura Tavares |
| Abstract |
Injuries of the spinal cord trigger local healing but hardly restore normal function. Spinal cord injury (SCI) has been deeply studied to develop strategies for functional recovery. The study by van Gorp and colleagues uses a rat model of acute SCI to characterize the effects of intraspinal grafting of human fetal spinal cord-derived neural stem cells (HSSCs). Among the range of results obtained, several positive outcomes related to a GABA-mediated inhibition were achieved. Their interesting article is a clear step forward in elucidating the neurobiology of SCI. Some issues to consider are related to the efficacy of the cell therapy in chronic spinal lesions and to pain responses, since the latter is a common complaint of people with SCI. Furthermore, the GABA-mediated hypothesis of recovery of function upon HSSC transplant needs to be fully tested by interfering with GABA receptors and analyzing neurobiological mechanisms that may invert the inhibitory role of GABA. The future challenge for SCI work will be the translation of knowledge acquired in basic research into clinically applicable strategies. The study by van Gorp and colleagues is an important contribution to that future. |
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 Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 28 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 24% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 10% |
| Engineering | 3 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 June 2013.
All research outputs
#8,675,129
of 25,709,917 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#947
of 2,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,224
of 210,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#17
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,709,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,788 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 210,358 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.