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 |
The role of barrier membranes for guided bone regeneration and restoration of large bone defects: current experimental and clinical evidence
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medicine, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1741-7015-10-81 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rozalia Dimitriou, George I Mataliotakis, Giorgio Maria Calori, Peter V Giannoudis |
| Abstract |
Treatment of large bone defects represents a great challenge in orthopedic and craniomaxillofacial surgery. Although there are several methods for bone reconstruction, they all have specific indications and limitations. The concept of using barrier membranes for restoration of bone defects has been developed in an effort to simplify their treatment by offering a single-staged procedure. Research on this field of bone regeneration is ongoing, with evidence being mainly attained from preclinical studies. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current experimental and clinical evidence on the use of barrier membranes for restoration of bone defects in maxillofacial and orthopedic surgery. Although there are a few promising preliminary human studies, before clinical applications can be recommended, future research should aim to establish the 'ideal' barrier membrane and delineate the need for additional bone grafting materials aiming to 'mimic' or even accelerate the normal process of bone formation. Reproducible results and long-term observations with barrier membranes in animal studies, and particularly in large animal models, are required as well as well-designed clinical studies to evaluate their safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 3 | 75% |
| Peru | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 441 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| India | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 432 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 80 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 53 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 47 | 11% |
| Researcher | 41 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 34 | 8% |
| Other | 84 | 19% |
| Unknown | 102 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 161 | 37% |
| Engineering | 33 | 7% |
| Materials Science | 31 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 4% |
| Other | 42 | 10% |
| Unknown | 130 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 23 August 2017.
All research outputs
#5,848,614
of 22,671,366 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,270
of 3,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,922
of 164,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#36
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,671,366 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,397 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 164,569 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.