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 |
Polymer mesh scaffold combined with cell-derived ECM for osteogenesis of human mesenchymal stem cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biomaterials Research, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40824-016-0055-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yong Kwan Noh, Ping Du, In Gul Kim, Jaehoon Ko, Seong Who Kim, Kwideok Park |
| Abstract |
Tissue-engineered scaffold should mimic the structure and biological function of the extracellular matrix and have mechanically supportive properties for tissue regeneration. In this study, we utilized a PLGA/PLA mesh scaffold, coated with cell-derived extracellular matrix (CDM) and assessed its potential as an osteogenic microenvironment for human umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells (UCB-MSCs). CDM was obtained by decellularization of in vitro-cultured type I collagen overexpressing (Col I -293 T-DK) cells. Test groups are mesh itself (control), fibronectin-coated (FN-mesh), and CDM-coated mesh scaffold (CDM-mesh). CDM was then solubilized and used for scaffold coating. CDM was successfully collected and applied to mesh scaffolds. The presence of CDM was confirmed via SEM and FN immunofluorescence. After then, UCB-MSCs were seeded into the scaffolds and subjected to the induction of osteogenic differentiation for 21 days in vitro. We found that the seeded cells were viable and have better proliferation activity on CDM-mesh scaffold. In addition, when osteogenic differentiation of UCB-MSCs was examined for up to 21 days, alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity and osteogenic marker (COL I, ALP, osteocalcin, bone sialoprotein) expression were significantly improved with UCB-MSCs when cultured in the CDM-mesh scaffold compared to the control and FN-mesh. Polymer mesh scaffold incorporated with CDM can provide UCB-MSCs with a better microenvironment for osteogenesis 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 8 | 14% |
| Materials Science | 8 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 23 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 December 2016.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Biomaterials Research
#139
of 197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,312
of 315,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biomaterials Research
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 315,515 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.