↓ Skip to main content

Endpoints in stem cell trials in ischemic heart failure

Overview of attention for article published in Stem Cell Research & Therapy, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Endpoints in stem cell trials in ischemic heart failure
Published in
Stem Cell Research & Therapy, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13287-015-0143-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marko Banovic, Zlatibor Loncar, Atta Behfar, Marc Vanderheyden, Branko Beleslin, Andreas Zeiher, Marco Metra, Andre Terzic, Jozef Bartunek

Abstract

Despite multimodal regimens and diverse treatment options alleviating disease symptoms, morbidity and mortality associated with advanced ischemic heart failure remain high. Recently, technological innovation has led to the development of regenerative therapeutic interventions aimed at halting or reversing the vicious cycle of heart failure progression. Driven by the unmet patient need and fueled by encouraging experimental studies, stem cell-based clinical trials have been launched over the past decade. Collectively, these trials have enrolled several thousand patients and demonstrated the clinical feasibility and safety of cell-based interventions. However, the totality of evidence supporting their efficacy in ischemic heart failure remains limited. Experience from the early randomized stem cell clinical trials underscores the key points in trial design ranging from adequate hypothesis formulation to selection of the optimal patient population, cell type and delivery route. Importantly, to translate the unprecedented promise of regenerative biotherapies into clinical benefit, it is crucial to ensure the appropriate choice of endpoints along the regulatory path. Accordingly, we here provide considerations relevant to the choice of endpoints for regenerative clinical trials in the ischemic heart failure setting.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 51 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Researcher 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Engineering 3 6%
Philosophy 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 14 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 01 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,284,293
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#160
of 2,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,133
of 266,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem Cell Research & Therapy
#2
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,419 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 266,766 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 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.