↓ Skip to main content

Cord Blood Banking Standards: Autologous Versus Altruistic

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
Cord Blood Banking Standards: Autologous Versus Altruistic
Published in
Frontiers in Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmed.2015.00094
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sue Armitage

Abstract

Cord blood (CB) is either donated to public CB banks for use by any patient worldwide for whom it is a match or stored in a private bank for potential autologous or family use. It is a unique cell product that has potential for treating life-threatening diseases. The majority of CB products used today are for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and are accessed from public banks. CB is still evolving as a hematopoietic stem cell source, developing as a source for cellular immunotherapy products, such as natural killer, dendritic, and T-cells, and fast emerging as a non-hematopoietic stem cell source in the field of regenerative medicine. This review explores the regulations, standards, and accreditation schemes that are currently available nationally and internationally for public and private CB banking. Currently, most of private banking is under regulated as compared to public banking. Regulations and standards were initially developed to address the public arena. Early responses from the medical field regarding private CB banking was that at the present time, because of insufficient scientific data to support autologous banking and given the difficulty of making an accurate estimate of the need for autologous transplantation, private storage of CB as "biological insurance" should be discouraged (1, 2, 3). To ensure success and the true realization of the full potential of CB, whether for autologous or allogeneic use, it is essential that each and every product provided for current and future treatments meets high-quality, international standards.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
China 1 2%
Unknown 39 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 20%
Other 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 12 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 10%
Chemistry 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 14 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#5,657,994
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Medicine
#1,208
of 5,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,335
of 393,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Medicine
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 393,792 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.