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 |
Dental Pulp Cells Isolated from Teeth with Superficial Caries Retain an Inflammatory Phenotype and Display an Enhanced Matrix Mineralization Potential
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2017.00244 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hanaa Alkharobi, James Beattie, Josie Meade, Deirdre Devine, Reem El-Gendy |
| Abstract |
We have isolated dental pulp cells (DPCs) from three healthy (hDPCs) and three carious (cDPCs) donors and shown that compared to hDPCs cells isolated from superficial carious lesions show higher clonogenic potential; show an equivalent proportion of cells with putative stem cell surface markers; show enhanced matrix mineralization capability; have enhanced angiogenic marker expression and retain the inflammatory phenotype in vitro characteristic of superficial caries lesions in vivo. Our findings suggest that cDPCs may be used for further investigation of the cross talk between inflammatory, angiogenic and mineralization pathways in repair of carious pulp. In addition cells derived from carious pulps (almost always discarded) may have potential for future applications in mineralized tissue repair and regeneration. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 21% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 53% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
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 30 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,418,183
of 22,968,808 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,441
of 13,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#270,141
of 310,521 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#181
of 245 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,968,808 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,720 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 310,521 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 245 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.