↓ Skip to main content

Engineering and Application of Pluripotent Stem Cells

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 29: Nonintegrating Human Somatic Cell Reprogramming Methods
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
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.
Chapter title
Nonintegrating Human Somatic Cell Reprogramming Methods
Chapter number 29
Book title
Engineering and Application of Pluripotent Stem Cells
Published in
Advances in biochemical engineering biotechnology, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/10_2017_29
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-973590-0, 978-3-31-973591-7
Authors

Thorsten M. Schlaeger

Abstract

Traditional biomedical research and preclinical studies frequently rely on animal models and repeatedly draw on a relatively small set of human cell lines, such as HeLa, HEK293, HepG2, HL60, and PANC1 cells. However, animal models often fail to reproduce important clinical phenotypes and conventional cell lines only represent a small number of cell types or diseases, have very limited ethnic/genetic diversity, and either senesce quickly or carry potentially confounding immortalizing mutations. In recent years, human pluripotent stem cells have attracted a lot of attention, in part because these cells promise more precise modeling of human diseases. Expectations are also high that pluripotent stem cell technologies can deliver cell-based therapeutics for the cure of a wide range of degenerative and other diseases. This review focuses on episomal and Sendai viral reprogramming modalities, which are the most popular methods for generating transgene-free human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs) from easily accessible cell sources. Graphical Abstract.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 47%
Unspecified 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 26%
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 28 October 2017.
All research outputs
#15,481,888
of 23,006,268 outputs
Outputs from Advances in biochemical engineering biotechnology
#114
of 225 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,334
of 421,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in biochemical engineering biotechnology
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,006,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 421,244 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.