| Title |
Embryonic–maternal cross-talk via exosomes: potential implications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Stem cells and cloning advances and applications, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/sccaa.s84991 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Islam M Saadeldin, Hyun Ju Oh, Byeong Chun Lee |
| Abstract |
A myriad of locally produced factors into the microenvironment of the reproductive tract is regulated, not one-way but rather, through embryonic-maternal cross-talk. In this mini-review, we focused on the exosomes, which are cell-derived vesicles of 30-100 nm in diameter, as a communicating language facilitating this dialog. These nanovesicles are secreted from pre-implantation embryos, oviduct epithelium, and endometrium as well as from the placenta, and contain proteins, messenger RNA (mRNA), microRNA, and DNA cargoes, and have pleiotropic effects on both embryonic and maternal environments. A better understanding of the molecular mechanisms mediating this cross-talk will lead to the development of new regulating agents, with novel diagnostic, biological, and therapeutic potential for either supporting or hindering the normal reproductive functions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 6 | 21% |
| Saudi Arabia | 5 | 17% |
| United States | 2 | 7% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 3% |
| France | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 12 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 93% |
| Scientists | 2 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 159 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 32 | 20% |
| Researcher | 24 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 18% |
| Unknown | 41 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 42 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 27 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 13% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 12 | 7% |
| Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Unknown | 46 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 18 March 2021.
All research outputs
#1,683,734
of 25,743,152 outputs
Outputs from Stem cells and cloning advances and applications
#5
of 69 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,385
of 278,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Stem cells and cloning advances and applications
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,743,152 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 69 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 278,295 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them