↓ Skip to main content

Direct Induction of Chondrogenic Cells from Human Dermal Fibroblast Culture by Defined Factors

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
10 X users
patent
7 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
112 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
Direct Induction of Chondrogenic Cells from Human Dermal Fibroblast Culture by Defined Factors
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0077365
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hidetatsu Outani, Minoru Okada, Akihiro Yamashita, Kanako Nakagawa, Hideki Yoshikawa, Noriyuki Tsumaki

Abstract

The repair of large cartilage defects with hyaline cartilage continues to be a challenging clinical issue. We recently reported that the forced expression of two reprogramming factors (c-Myc and Klf4) and one chondrogenic factor (SOX9) can induce chondrogenic cells from mouse dermal fibroblast culture without going through a pluripotent state. We here generated induced chondrogenic (iChon) cells from human dermal fibroblast (HDF) culture with the same factors. We developed a chondrocyte-specific COL11A2 promoter/enhancer lentiviral reporter vector to select iChon cells. The human iChon cells expressed marker genes for chondrocytes but not fibroblasts, and were derived from non-chondrogenic COL11A2-negative cells. The human iChon cells formed cartilage but not tumors in nude mice. This approach could lead to the preparation of cartilage directly from skin in human, without going through pluripotent stem cells.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 110 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 20%
Researcher 20 18%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 10%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 19 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 19%
Engineering 4 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 22 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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 09 September 2021.
All research outputs
#780,005
of 26,274,958 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#10,234
of 228,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,501
of 225,536 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#271
of 5,156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,274,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 228,600 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 225,536 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,156 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 94% of its contemporaries.