↓ Skip to main content

Defining the Balance between Regeneration and Pathological Ossification in Skeletal Muscle Following Traumatic Injury

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 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
Defining the Balance between Regeneration and Pathological Ossification in Skeletal Muscle Following Traumatic Injury
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00194
Pubmed ID
Authors

Owen G. Davies, Yang Liu, Darren J. Player, Neil R. W. Martin, Liam M. Grover, Mark P. Lewis

Abstract

Heterotopic ossification (HO) is characterized by the formation of bone at atypical sites. This type of ectopic bone formation is most prominent in skeletal muscle, most frequently resulting as a consequence of physical trauma and associated with aberrant tissue regeneration. The condition is debilitating, reducing a patient's range of motion and potentially causing severe pathologies resulting from nerve and vascular compression. Despite efforts to understand the pathological processes governing HO, there remains a lack of consensus regarding the micro-environmental conditions conducive to its formation, and attempting to define the balance between muscle regeneration and pathological ossification remains complex. The development of HO is thought to be related to a complex interplay between factors released both locally and systemically in response to trauma. It develops as skeletal muscle undergoes significant repair and regeneration, and is likely to result from the misdirected differentiation of endogenous or systemically derived progenitors in response to biochemical and/or environmental cues. The process can be sequentially delineated by the presence of inflammation, tissue breakdown, adipogenesis, hypoxia, neo-vasculogenesis, chondrogenesis and ossification. However, exactly how each of these stages contributes to the formation of HO is at present not well understood. Our previous review examined the cellular contribution to HO. Therefore, the principal aim of this review will be to comprehensively outline changes in the local tissue micro-environment following trauma, and identify how these changes can alter the balance between skeletal muscle regeneration and ectopic ossification. An understanding of the mechanisms governing this condition is required for the development and advancement of HO prophylaxis and treatment, and may even hold the key to unlocking novel methods for engineering hard tissues.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Master 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 19 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 11%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 24 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,057,029
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,933
of 13,712 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,409
of 308,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#96
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,712 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 308,921 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.