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 |
Wound healing: time to look for intelligent, ‘natural’ immunological approaches?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Immunology, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12865-017-0207-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Olivier Garraud, Wael N. Hozzein, Gamal Badr |
| Abstract |
There is now good evidence that cytokines and growth factors are key factors in tissue repair and often exert anti-infective activities. However, engineering such factors for global use, even in the most remote places, is not realistic. Instead, we propose to examine how such factors work and to evaluate the reparative tools generously provided by 'nature.' We used two approaches to address these objectives. The first approach was to reappraise the internal capacity of the factors contributing the most to healing in the body, i.e., blood platelets. The second was to revisit natural agents such as whey proteins, (honey) bee venom and propolis. The platelet approach elucidates the inflammation spectrum from physiology to pathology, whereas milk and honey derivatives accelerate diabetic wound healing. Thus, this review aims at offering a fresh view of how wound healing can be addressed by natural means. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Kenya | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 211 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 10% |
| Researcher | 17 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 29 | 14% |
| Unknown | 91 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 26 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 4% |
| Other | 32 | 15% |
| Unknown | 93 | 44% |
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 19 March 2023.
All research outputs
#15,180,771
of 25,784,004 outputs
Outputs from BMC Immunology
#249
of 625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,848
of 330,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Immunology
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,784,004 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 625 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 330,986 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 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.