↓ Skip to main content

Bioactive Glasses: Frontiers and Challenges

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
275 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
444 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
Bioactive Glasses: Frontiers and Challenges
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, November 2015
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2015.00194
Pubmed ID
Authors

Larry L. Hench, Julian R. Jones

Abstract

Bioactive glasses were discovered in 1969 and provided for the first time an alternative to nearly inert implant materials. Bioglass formed a rapid, strong, and stable bond with host tissues. This article examines the frontiers of research crossed to achieve clinical use of bioactive glasses and glass-ceramics. In the 1980s, it was discovered that bioactive glasses could be used in particulate form to stimulate osteogenesis, which thereby led to the concept of regeneration of tissues. Later, it was discovered that the dissolution ions from the glasses behaved like growth factors, providing signals to the cells. This article summarizes the frontiers of knowledge crossed during four eras of development of bioactive glasses that have led from concept of bioactivity to widespread clinical and commercial use, with emphasis on the first composition, 45S5 Bioglass(®). The four eras are (a) discovery, (b) clinical application, (c) tissue regeneration, and (d) innovation. Questions still to be answered for the fourth era are included to stimulate innovation in the field and exploration of new frontiers that can be the basis for a general theory of bioactive stimulation of regeneration of tissues and application to numerous clinical needs.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 444 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 441 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 79 18%
Student > Master 56 13%
Student > Bachelor 46 10%
Researcher 42 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 4%
Other 46 10%
Unknown 156 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Materials Science 88 20%
Engineering 58 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 42 9%
Chemistry 21 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 3%
Other 37 8%
Unknown 183 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 30 November 2015.
All research outputs
#15,351,145
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#2,619
of 6,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,219
of 387,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#28
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,565 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 387,537 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.