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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Protective effect of polysaccharides on the stability of parenteral emulsions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Development & Industrial Pharmacy, May 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3109/03639045.2012.684389 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Guihong Chai, Feng Sun, Jianli Shi, Bin Tian, Xing Tang |
| Abstract |
The main purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of two polysaccharides (dextran, hydroxyethyl starch) on the stability of parenteral emulsions. All parenteral emulsions were prepared by high-pressure homogenization. The influence of polysaccharides concentration was studied. The stabilities of autoclaving sterilization, centrifugation and freeze-thawing process were investigated extensively. Following the addition of polysaccharides, the stabilities of the parenteral emulsions were improved. A high-concentration polysaccharides solution (13%, w/v) produced better protection than a low one (1.3%, w/v), especially during freeze-thawing process. The protective mechanisms of polysaccharides were attributed to increasing systematic viscosity, non-frozen water absorbed by polysaccharides, formation of a linear bead-like structure and thicker mixed emulsifier film. Overall, polysaccharides can offer greatly increased protection for parenteral emulsions, and represent a novel protective strategy for improving the stability of this delivery system. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 8 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 22% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 11% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 11% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 September 2020.
All research outputs
#8,261,140
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Drug Development & Industrial Pharmacy
#386
of 1,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,280
of 176,331 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Development & Industrial Pharmacy
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,655 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 176,331 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.