↓ Skip to main content

Biomechanical comparison of menisci from different species and artificial constructs

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 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
Biomechanical comparison of menisci from different species and artificial constructs
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-14-324
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gunther H Sandmann, Christopher Adamczyk, Eduardo Grande Garcia, Stefan Doebele, Andreas Buettner, Stefan Milz, Andreas B Imhoff, Stefan Vogt, Rainer Burgkart, Thomas Tischer

Abstract

Loss of meniscal tissue is correlated with early osteoarthritis but few data exist regarding detailed biomechanical properties (e.g. viscoelastic behavior) of menisci in different species commonly used as animal models. The purpose of the current study was to biomechanically characterize bovine, ovine, and porcine menisci (each n = 6, midpart of the medial meniscus) and compare their properties to that of normal and degenerated human menisci (n = 6) and two commercially available artificial scaffolds (each n = 3).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 91 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 19%
Researcher 17 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 19 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 25 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 20 21%

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 21 November 2013.
All research outputs
#13,879,223
of 21,353,728 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,152
of 3,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,256
of 299,471 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#195
of 347 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,353,728 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,763 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 299,471 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 347 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.