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 |
An assessment of the factors affecting the commercialization of cell-based therapeutics: a systematic review protocol
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-017-0517-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Pettitt, Zeeshaan Arshad, Benjamin Davies, James Smith, Anna French, Doug Cole, Kim Bure, Sue Dopson, David DiGiusto, Jeff Karp, Brock Reeve, Richard Barker, Georg Holländer, David Brindley |
| Abstract |
Cellular-based therapies represent a platform technology within the rapidly expanding field of regenerative medicine and are distinct from conventional therapeutics-offering a unique approach to managing what were once considered untreatable diseases. Despite a significant increase in basic science activity within the cell therapy arena, alongside a growing portfolio of cell therapy trials and promising investment, the translation of cellular-based therapeutics from "bench to bedside" remains challenging, and the number of industry products available for widespread clinical use remains comparatively low. This systematic review identifies unique intrinsic and extrinsic barriers in the cell-based therapy domain. Eight electronic databases will be searched, specifically Medline, EMBASE (OvidSP), BIOSIS & Web of Science, Cochrane Library & HEED, EconLit (ProQuest), WHOLIS WHO Library Database, PAIS International (ProQuest), and Scopus. Addition to this gray literature was searched by manually reviewing relevant work. All identified articles will be subjected for review by two authors who will decide whether or not each article passes our inclusion/exclusion criteria. Eligible papers will subsequently be reviewed, and key data extracted into a pre-designed data extraction scorecard. An assessment of the perceived impact of broad commercial barriers to the adoption of cell-based therapies will be conducted. These broad categories will include manufacturing, regulation and intellectual property, reimbursement, clinical trials, clinical adoption, ethics, and business models. This will inform further discussion in the review. There is no PROSPERO registration number. Through a systematic search and appraisal of available literature, this review will identify key challenges in the commercialization pathway of cellular-based therapeutics and highlights significant barriers impeding successful clinical adoption. This will aid in creating an adaptable, acceptable, and harmonized approach supported by apposite regulatory frameworks and pertinent expertise throughout the respective stages of the adoption cycle to facilitate the adoption of new products and technologies in the industry. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 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 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 79 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Researcher | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 24% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 10% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 25% |
| Unknown | 23 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 September 2017.
All research outputs
#3,771,274
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#728
of 2,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,806
of 315,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#23
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. 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 315,536 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 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 57% of its contemporaries.