| Title |
Cardiac cell type-specific responses to injury and contributions to heart regeneration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell Regeneration, February 2021
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13619-020-00065-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Weijia Zhang, Jinxiu Liang, Peidong Han |
| Abstract |
Heart disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide. Due to the limited proliferation rate of mature cardiomyocytes, adult mammalian hearts are unable to regenerate damaged cardiac muscle following injury. Instead, injured area is replaced by fibrotic scar tissue, which may lead to irreversible cardiac remodeling and organ failure. In contrast, adult zebrafish and neonatal mammalian possess the capacity for heart regeneration and have been widely used as experimental models. Recent studies have shown that multiple types of cells within the heart can respond to injury with the activation of distinct signaling pathways. Determining the specific contributions of each cell type is essential for our understanding of the regeneration network organization throughout the heart. In this review, we provide an overview of the distinct functions and coordinated cell behaviors of several major cell types including cardiomyocytes, endocardial cells, epicardial cells, fibroblasts, and immune cells. The topic focuses on their specific responses and cellular plasticity after injury, and potential therapeutic applications. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 7 | 23% |
| Researcher | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 23% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 32% |
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 25 June 2021.
All research outputs
#18,807,229
of 23,308,124 outputs
Outputs from Cell Regeneration
#116
of 159 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#378,838
of 505,475 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Regeneration
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,308,124 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 159 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 505,475 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.