↓ Skip to main content

Blood-Contacting Biomaterials: In Vitro Evaluation of the Hemocompatibility

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, July 2018
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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
18 X users
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
454 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
614 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
Blood-Contacting Biomaterials: In Vitro Evaluation of the Hemocompatibility
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00099
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marbod Weber, Heidrun Steinle, Sonia Golombek, Ludmilla Hann, Christian Schlensak, Hans P. Wendel, Meltem Avci-Adali

Abstract

Hemocompatibility of blood-contacting biomaterials is one of the most important criteria for their successful in vivo applicability. Thus, extensive in vitro analyses according to ISO 10993-4 are required prior to clinical applications. In this review, we summarize essential aspects regarding the evaluation of the hemocompatibility of biomaterials and the required in vitro analyses for determining the blood compatibility. Static, agitated, or shear flow models are used to perform hemocompatibility studies. Before and after the incubation of the test material with fresh human blood, hemolysis, cell counts, and the activation of platelets, leukocytes, coagulation and complement system are analyzed. Furthermore, the surface of biomaterials are evaluated concerning attachment of blood cells, adsorption of proteins, and generation of thrombus and fibrin networks.

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 18 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 614 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 614 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 89 14%
Student > Master 69 11%
Researcher 62 10%
Student > Bachelor 61 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 35 6%
Other 61 10%
Unknown 237 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 84 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 53 9%
Materials Science 47 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 34 6%
Chemistry 32 5%
Other 100 16%
Unknown 264 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 16 December 2021.
All research outputs
#2,156,063
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#246
of 6,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,124
of 325,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#12
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,484 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 325,586 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.