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 |
Regenerative medicine in China: demands, capacity, and regulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Burns & Trauma, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41038-016-0046-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Biao Cheng, Shuliang Lu, Xiaobing Fu |
| Abstract |
Regenerative medicine (RM) is an emerging interdisciplinary field of research. Its clinical application focuses on the repair, replacement, and regeneration of cells, tissues, and organs by approaches including cell reprogramming, stem cell transplantation, tissue engineering, activating factors, and clone treatment. RM has become a hot point of research in China and other countries. China's main and local governments have attached great importance to RM and given strong support in relevant policies and funding. About 3.5 billion RMB has been invested in this field. Since 1999, China has established about 30 RM centers and cooperates with many advanced countries in RM research and benefits from their cooperation. However, China needs to develop standards, regulations, and management practices suitable for the healthy development of RM. In this review, we focus on its great demand, capacity, and relative regulations. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 38% |
| Librarian | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 38% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 13% |
| Engineering | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
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 14 September 2019.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Burns & Trauma
#268
of 304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,047
of 353,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Burns & Trauma
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 353,810 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.