↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Increased NIH 3T3 fibroblast functions on cell culture dishes which mimic the nanometer fibers of natural tissues

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Increased NIH 3T3 fibroblast functions on cell culture dishes which mimic the nanometer fibers of natural tissues
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2015
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s83007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Garima Bhardwaj, Thomas J Webster

Abstract

Traditional flat tissue cell culture dishes have consisted of polystyrene treated with plasma gases for growing, subculturing, and studying cell behavior in vitro. However, increasingly it has been observed that mimicking natural tissue properties (such as chemistry, three-dimensional structure, mechanical properties, etc) in vitro can lead to a better correlation of in vitro to in vivo cellular functions. The following studies compared traditional NIH 3T3 fibroblasts' functions on XanoMatrix scaffolds to standard tissue culture polystyrene. Results found significantly greater fibroblast adhesion and proliferation on XanoMatrix cell culture dishes which mimic the nanoscale geometry of natural tissue fibers with true, tortuous fiber beds creating a robust, consistent, and versatile growth platform. In this manner, this study supports that cell culture dishes which mimic features of natural tissues should be continually studied for a wide range of applications in which mimicking natural cellular functions are important.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 28%
Student > Master 4 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 4%
Professor 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 6 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 6 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 12%
Materials Science 3 12%
Chemistry 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 6 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 December 2015.
All research outputs
#8,262,445
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,007
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,420
of 276,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#28
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 276,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.