↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Polyethylene glycol in spinal cord injury repair: a critical review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of experimental pharmacology, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 Mendeley
Title
Polyethylene glycol in spinal cord injury repair: a critical review
Published in
Journal of experimental pharmacology, July 2018
DOI 10.2147/jep.s148944
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xi Lu, T Hiran Perera, Alexander B Aria, Laura A Smith Callahan

Abstract

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is a synthetic biocompatible polymer with many useful properties for developing therapeutics to treat spinal cord injury. Direct application of PEG as a fusogen to the injury site can repair cell membranes, mitigate oxidative stress, and promote axonal regeneration to restore motor function. PEG can be covalently or noncovalently conjugated to proteins, peptides, and nanoparticles to limit their clearance by the reticuloendothelial system, reduce their immunogenicity, and facilitate crossing the blood-brain barrier. Cross-linking PEG produces hydrogels that can act as delivery vehicles for bioactive molecules including growth factors and cells such as bone marrow stromal cells, which can modulate the inflammatory response and support neural tissue regeneration. PEG hydrogels can be cross-linked in vitro or delivered as an injectable formulation that can gel in situ at the site of injury. Chemical and mechanical properties of PEG hydrogels are tunable and must be optimized for creating the most favorable delivery environment. Peptides mimicking extracellular matrix protein such as laminin and n-cadherin can be incorporated into PEG hydrogels to promote neural differentiation and axonal extensions. Different hydrogel cross-linking densities and stiffness will also affect the differentiation process. PEG hydrogels with a gradient of peptide concentrations or Young's modulus have been developed to systematically study these factors. This review will describe these and other recent advancements of PEG in the field of spinal cord injury in greater detail.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 110 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 18%
Student > Master 17 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Researcher 12 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 5%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 25 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 15 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 10%
Neuroscience 10 9%
Materials Science 9 8%
Other 20 18%
Unknown 32 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 26 July 2022.
All research outputs
#20,140,268
of 25,621,213 outputs
Outputs from Journal of experimental pharmacology
#92
of 151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#251,608
of 342,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of experimental pharmacology
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,621,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 342,293 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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.