↓ Skip to main content

Cardiac Extracellular Matrix

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 11: Clinical Trial Design for Investigational Cardio-Regenerative Therapy
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Clinical Trial Design for Investigational Cardio-Regenerative Therapy
Chapter number 11
Book title
Cardiac Extracellular Matrix
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-97421-7_11
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-997420-0, 978-3-31-997421-7
Authors

Amish N. Raval, Raval, Amish N.

Abstract

Human trials of cardio-regenerative biologic therapies are being performed worldwide to address a growing, unmet need for durable treatments of cardiovascular disease. A well-constructed clinical trial design for these novel therapies requires careful attention to defining a clear hypothesis, a patient population, and anticipated outcomes. The scope of screening, method of randomization, blinding approach, data monitoring, and statistical analysis plan are the foundational elements that must be addressed in any clinical trial. Although the experience of human trials involving extracellular matrix constructs for cardiovascular disease treatment is limited, numerous lessons have been learned in the field of cell therapy that are translatable across all biologic treatment options. Future progress in this field may include testing combinations of cells, gene-transfer agents, and matrix and identifying treatment responders versus nonresponders.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 18%
Student > Bachelor 3 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Unknown 7 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 29%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Chemistry 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 7 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 01 July 2020.
All research outputs
#4,244,144
of 23,103,903 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#702
of 4,976 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,336
of 341,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#9
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,903 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,976 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 341,592 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.