The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
| Title |
Pre- and postmortem imaging of transplanted cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s83557 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anna Andrzejewska, Adam Nowakowski, Miroslaw Janowski, Jeff WM Bulte, Assaf A Gilad, Piotr Walczak, Barbara Lukomska |
| Abstract |
Therapeutic interventions based on the transplantation of stem and progenitor cells have garnered increasing interest. This interest is fueled by successful preclinical studies for indications in many diseases, including the cardiovascular, central nervous, and musculoskeletal system. Further progress in this field is contingent upon access to techniques that facilitate an unambiguous identification and characterization of grafted cells. Such methods are invaluable for optimization of cell delivery, improvement of cell survival, and assessment of the functional integration of grafted cells. Following is a focused overview of the currently available cell detection and tracking methodologies that covers the entire spectrum from pre- to postmortem cell identification. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Austria | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 8 | 22% |
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 03 September 2015.
All research outputs
#16,048,318
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,887
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,250
of 276,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#74
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 276,791 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 154 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.