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.
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 |
Guiding Device for Precision Grafting of Peripheral Nerves in Complete Thoracic Spinal Cord Injury: Design and Sizing for Clinical Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neurology, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fneur.2018.00356 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arvid Frostell, Per Mattsson, Mikael Svensson |
| Abstract |
In an effort to translate preclinical success in achieving spinal cord regeneration through peripheral nerve grafts, this study details the design and sizing of a guiding device for precision grafting of peripheral nerves for use in a clinical trial in complete (AIS-A) thoracic spinal cord injury (SCI). The device's design and sizing are compared to a simulation of human spinal cord sizes based on the best available data. Spinal cord segmental sizes were generated by computer simulation based on data from a meta-analysis recently published by our group. Thoracic segments T2-T12 were plotted, and seven elliptical shapes were positioned across the center of the distribution of sizes. Geometrical measures of error-of-fit were calculated. CAD modeling was used to create cranial and caudal interfaces for the human spinal cord, aiming to guide descending white matter tracts to gray matter at the caudal end of the device and ascending white matter tracts to gray matter at the cranial end of the device. The interfaces were compared qualitatively to the simulated spinal cord sizes and gray-to-white matter delineations. The mean error-of-fit comparing simulated spinal cord segments T2-T12 to the best elliptical shape was 0.41 and 0.36 mm, and the 95th percentile was found at 1.3 and 0.98 mm for transverse and anteroposterior diameter, respectively. A guiding device design was reached for capturing the majority of corticospinal axons at the cranial end of the device and guiding them obliquely to gray matter at the caudal end of the device. Based on qualitative comparison, the vast majority of spinal cord sizes generated indicate an excellent fit to the device's interfaces. A set of SCI guiding devices of seven sizes can cover the variability of human thoracic spinal cord segments T2-T12 with an acceptable error-of-fit for the elliptical shape as well as guiding channels. The computational framework developed can be used with other medical technologies involving the human spinal cord where exact sizes and positioning are of importance. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Researcher | 1 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 2 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 18% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 36% |
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 07 June 2018.
All research outputs
#17,964,768
of 23,070,218 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#7,179
of 11,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,784
of 330,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#188
of 307 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,070,218 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,973 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 330,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 307 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.