↓ Skip to main content

Production and Evaluation of an Antimicrobial Peptide-Containing Wafer Formulation for Topical Application

Overview of attention for article published in Current Microbiology, November 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Production and Evaluation of an Antimicrobial Peptide-Containing Wafer Formulation for Topical Application
Published in
Current Microbiology, November 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00284-012-0268-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noelle H. O’Driscoll, Olga Labovitiadi, T. P. Tim Cushnie, Kerr H. Matthews, Derry K. Mercer, Andrew J. Lamb

Abstract

A targeted approach for direct topical antimicrobial delivery involving the formulation of impregnated freeze-dried wafers prepared from a natural polymer has been assessed to consider potential for treatment of wounded skin. The synthetic cationic antimicrobial peptides (CAPs) NP101 and NP108 were found to have modest in vitro activity against bacterial species commonly associated with wound infections. Minimum inhibitory concentration/minimum bactericidal concentrations against Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were found to be 0.31 mg/ml for NP101 and 0.25-0.5 mg/ml for NP108. Rapid, substantial cytoplasmic potassium loss was induced by NP108 in E. coli, but not the other species. Through scanning electron microscopy, both CAPs were observed to alter cell morphology, prevent normal septation, promote cell aggregation and trigger release or formation of extracellular filaments. Wafers harbouring these agents displayed substantial antibacterial activity when assessed by standard diffusion assay. These data confirm that topical delivery of CAPs, through their incorporation within freeze-dried wafer formulations prepared from natural polymers, represents a potential viable approach for treating skin infection.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 29%
Student > Master 10 16%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Professor 4 6%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 23%
Chemistry 10 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 13%
Computer Science 5 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 10 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 October 2022.
All research outputs
#8,759,452
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Current Microbiology
#572
of 2,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,350
of 288,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Microbiology
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,713 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 288,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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.