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 |
Investigations of silk fiber/calcium phosphate cement biocomposite for radial bone defect repair in rabbits
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13018-017-0529-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lei Zhou, Chunjie Hu, Yingjun Chen, Shiqi Xia, Jinglong Yan |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to investigate the effects of silk fiber (SF)/calcium phosphate cement (CPC) biocomposite on repairing radial bone defects in rabbits. Four-month-old New Zealand rabbits were selected to create a bilateral radial bone defect model and divided into four groups according to implanted material: SF/CPC, SF/CPC/particulate bone (PB), PB, and control (C). The specimens were removed at four and eight postoperative weeks for general observation, X-ray examination, tissue slicing, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and biomechanical testing. Postoperative X-ray showed no bone defect repair in group C and different degrees of bone defect repair in the other three groups. Imaging, histology, and SEM showed the following: group SF/CPC formed fine trabecular bone in week 4, while the maximum bending load in group SF/CPC in week 4 was significantly different from those in the other groups (P < 0.05). SF/CPC has good biocompatibility and bone-inducing ability, demonstrating its bone defect-repairing ability. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 23% |
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 15% |
| Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 23% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 15% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 4 | 31% |
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 22 February 2017.
All research outputs
#18,534,624
of 22,955,959 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#959
of 1,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,878
of 310,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#19
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,955,959 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 1,391 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. 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 310,778 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.