The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
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 |
Impact of electromagnetic fields on stem cells: common mechanisms at the crossroad between adult neurogenesis and osteogenesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncel.2015.00228 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lucia Leone, Maria Vittoria Podda, Claudio Grassi |
| Abstract |
In the recent years adult neural and mesenchymal stem cells have been intensively investigated as effective resources for repair therapies. In vivo and in vitro studies have provided insights on the molecular mechanisms underlying the neurogenic and osteogenic processes in adulthood. This knowledge appears fundamental for the development of targeted strategies to manipulate stem cells. Here we review recent literature dealing with the effects of electromagnetic fields on stem cell biology that lends support to their use as a promising tool to positively influence the different steps of neurogenic and osteogenic processes. We will focus on recent studies revealing that extremely-low frequency electromagnetic fields enhance adult hippocampal neurogenesis by inducing epigenetic modifications on the regulatory sequences of genes responsible for neural stem cell proliferation and neuronal differentiation. In light of the emerging critical role played by chromatin modifications in maintaining the stemness as well as in regulating stem cell differentiation, we will also attempt to exploit epigenetic changes that can represent common targets for electromagnetic field effects on neurogenic and osteogenic processes. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 65 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 18% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 8% |
| Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 9% |
| Engineering | 6 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 10 | 15% |
| Unknown | 18 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 11 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,191,802
of 24,160,198 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#660
of 4,495 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,413
of 268,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#20
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,160,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,495 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 268,124 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.