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.
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.
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 |
Fate of graft cells: what should be clarified for development of mesenchymal stem cell therapy for ischemic stroke?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncel.2014.00322 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuka Ikegame, Kentaro Yamashita, Shigeru Nakashima, Yuichi Nomura, Shingo Yonezawa, Yoshitaka Asano, Jun Shinoda, Hideaki Hara, Toru Iwama |
| Abstract |
Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) are believed to be promising for cell administration therapy after ischemic stroke. Because of their advantageous characteristics, such as ability of differentiation into neurovascular lineages, avoidance of immunological problems, and abundance of graft cells in mesodermal tissues, studies regarding MSC therapy have increased recently. However, several controversies are yet to be resolved before a worldwide consensus regarding a standard protocol is obtained. In particular, the neuroprotective effects, the rate of cell migration to the lesion, and differentiation direction differ depending on preclinical observations. Analyses of these differences and application of recent developments in stem cell biology or engineering in imaging modality may contribute to identification of criteria for optimal stem cell therapy in which reliable protocols, which control cell quality and include safe administration procedures, are defined for each recovery phase after cerebral ischemia. In this mini review, we examine controversies regarding the fate of grafts and the prospects for advanced therapy that could be obtained through recent developments in stem cell research as direct conversion to neural cells. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 24% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 22% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
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 06 April 2019.
All research outputs
#18,385,510
of 22,772,779 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#3,242
of 4,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,726
of 259,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#48
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,772,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 259,777 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.