↓ Skip to main content

Method to characterize inorganic particulates in lung tissue biopsies using field emission scanning electron microscopy

Overview of attention for article published in Toxicology Methods, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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.
Title
Method to characterize inorganic particulates in lung tissue biopsies using field emission scanning electron microscopy
Published in
Toxicology Methods, April 2018
DOI 10.1080/15376516.2018.1449042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heather A. Lowers, G. N. Breit, M. Strand, R. M. Pillers, G. P. Meeker, T. I. Todorov, G. S. Plumlee, R. E. Wolf, M. Robinson, J. Parr, R. Miller, S. Groshong, F. Green, C. Rose

Abstract

Humans accumulate large numbers of inorganic particles in their lungs over a lifetime. Whether this causes or contributes to debilitating disease over a normal lifespan depends on the type and concentration of the particles. We developed and tested a protocol for in situ characterization of the types and distribution of inorganic particles in biopsied lung tissue from three human groups using field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) combined with energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). Many distinct particle types were recognized among the 13 000 particles analyzed. Silica, feldspars, clays, titanium dioxides, iron oxides and phosphates were the most common constituents in all samples. Particles were classified into three general groups: endogenous, which form naturally in the body; exogenic particles, natural earth materials; and anthropogenic particles, attributed to industrial sources. These in situ results were compared with those using conventional sodium hypochlorite tissue digestion and particle filtration. With the exception of clays and phosphates, the relative abundances of most common particle types were similar in both approaches. Nonetheless, the digestion/filtration method was determined to alter the texture and relative abundances of some particle types. SEM/EDS analysis of digestion filters could be automated in contrast to the more time intensive in situ analyses.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 21%
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 1 3%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 11 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 2 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 12 41%
Attention Score in Context

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 24 April 2021.
All research outputs
#16,053,755
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Toxicology Methods
#227
of 475 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,694
of 340,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Toxicology Methods
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 475 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 340,059 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 6 of them.