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 |
Different tenogenic differentiation capacities of different mesenchymal stem cells in the presence of BMP-12
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Translational Medicine, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12967-015-0560-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Linghui Dai, Xiaoqing Hu, Xin Zhang, Jingxian Zhu, Jiying Zhang, Xin Fu, Xiaoning Duan, Yingfang Ao, Chunyan Zhou |
| Abstract |
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are regarded as a promising cell-based therapeutic tool for tendon repair. This study aimed to compare the different tenogenic differentiation capacities of the three types of MSCs in the presence of bone morphogenic protein 12 (BMP-12). MSCs were isolated from rat bone marrow (BM), inguinal adipose tissue (AD), and synovium (SM) from the knee joint. MSCs were characterized by morphology, proliferation, trilineage differentiation, and surface marker analysis. Tenogenic differentiation potential was initially assessed using real-time polymerase chain reaction, Western blot, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in vitro. Histological assessments were also performed after subcutaneous implantation of BMP-12 recombinant adenovirus-infected MSCs in nude mice in vivo. The three types of MSCs exhibited similar fibroblast-like morphology and surface markers but different differentiation potentials toward adipogenic, osteogenic, and chondrogenic lineage fates. Bone marrow-derived MSCs (BM-MSCs) showed the most superior in vitro tenogenic differentiation capacity, followed by synovial membrane-derived MSCs (SM-MSCs) and then adipose-derived MSCs (AD-MSCs). After implantation, all three types of MSC masses infected with BMP-12 recombinant adenovirus emerged in the form of fiber-like matrix, especially in 6-week specimens, compared with the control MSCs in vivo. BM-MSCs and SM-MSCs revealed more intense staining for collagen type I (Col I) compared with AD-MSCs. Differences were not observed between BM-MSCs and SM-MSCs. However, SM-MSCs demonstrated higher proliferation capacity than BM-MSCs. BM-MSCs exhibited the most superior tenogenic differentiation capacity, followed by SM-MSCs. By contrast, AD-MSCs demonstrated the inferior capacity among the three types of MSCs in the presence of BMP-12 both in vivo and in vitro. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 83 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 16% |
| Researcher | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 11% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 17 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 13% |
| Engineering | 9 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 21 | 25% |
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 03 July 2015.
All research outputs
#14,230,708
of 22,815,414 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,780
of 3,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,759
of 264,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#57
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,815,414 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,991 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 264,050 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.