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 |
Effective Cancer Cell Killing by Hydrophobic Nanovoid‐Enhanced Cavitation under Safe Low‐Energy Ultrasound
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Chemistry - An Asian Journal, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/asia.201301333 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yang Zhao, Yingchun Zhu, Jingke Fu, Lianzhou Wang |
| Abstract |
β-Cyclodextrin (β-CD)-capped mesoporous silica nanoparticles with hydrophobic internal nanovoids were prepared and used for effective cancer cell killing in synergistic combination with low-energy ultrasound (≤1.0 W cm(-2) , 1 MHz). The water-dispersible nanoparticles with hydrophobic internal nanovoids can be taken up by cancer cells and subsequently evoke a remarkable cavitation effect under irradiation with mild low-energy ultrasound (≤1.0 W cm(-2) , 1 MHz). A significant cancer cell killing effect was observed in cancer cells and in a mouse xenograft tumor model treated with the nanoagents together with the low-energy ultrasound, showing a distinct dependence on the concentration of nanoagents and ultrasound intensity. By contrast, an antitumor effect was not observed when either low-energy ultrasound or nanoagents were applied alone. These findings are significant as the technique promises a safe, low-cost, and effective treatment for cancer therapy. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 5 | 15% |
| Materials Science | 4 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 14 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 10 February 2014.
All research outputs
#16,191,677
of 24,629,540 outputs
Outputs from Chemistry - An Asian Journal
#1,625
of 5,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,561
of 318,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chemistry - An Asian Journal
#13
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,629,540 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,904 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 318,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.