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 |
Clinical observation of umbilical cord mesenchymal stem cell transplantation in treatment for sequelae of thoracolumbar spinal cord injury
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-014-0253-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hongbin Cheng, Xuebin Liu, Rongrong Hua, Guanghui Dai, Xiaodong Wang, Jianhua Gao, Yihua An |
| Abstract |
BackgroundUmbilical cord mesenchymal stem cells (UCMSCs) have a considerable advantage and potential in treating for central nervous system diseases and have become a novel alternative treatment for spinal cord injury. This study aims to compare the neurological function outcome of stem cell transplantation, rehabilitation therapy, and self-healing for sequelae of spinal cord injury.MethodsThirty-four cases of thoracolumbar spinal cord injury were randomly divided into three groups: the stem cell transplantation group was given CT-guided UCMSC transplantation twice; the rehabilitation group received rehabilitation therapy; and the blank control group did not receive any specific treatment. AIS grading, ASIA scoring, the manual muscle strength and muscle tension scale, and the Barthel index were used to evaluate the clinical outcome. Urodynamic examination was also performed for patients in the UCMSC group and the rehabilitation therapy group.ResultsSeven of the ten patients in the UCMSC group had significant and stable improvement in movement, self-care ability, and muscular tension; five of the forteen patients (36%) in the rehabilitation group also had certain improvement in these aspects. Urodynamic examination demonstrated that patients in the UCMSC group exhibited an increase in maximum urinary flow rate and maximum bladder capacity, as well as a decrease in residue urine volume and maximum detrusor pressure. The rehabilitation group exhibited decreased maximum bladder capacity, but no perceptible change in maximum urinary flow rate, residue urine volume or maximum detrusor pressure.ConclusionsUCMSC transplantation can effectively improve neurological functional recovery after spinal cord injury, and its efficacy is superior to that of rehabilitation therapy and self-healing.Trial registrationThe present clinical study was registered at chictr.org (registration number: NCT01393977). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 177 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 173 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 26 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 10% |
| Unknown | 54 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 37 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 22 | 12% |
| Unknown | 64 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 12 May 2016.
All research outputs
#2,280,567
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#363
of 4,117 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,355
of 244,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#4
of 81 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,117 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 244,723 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 81 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.