↓ Skip to main content

Cellulose Buccoadhesive Film Bearing Glimepiride: Physicomechanical Characterization and Biophysics of Buccoadhesion

Overview of attention for article published in AAPS PharmSciTech, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
Title
Cellulose Buccoadhesive Film Bearing Glimepiride: Physicomechanical Characterization and Biophysics of Buccoadhesion
Published in
AAPS PharmSciTech, October 2015
DOI 10.1208/s12249-015-0419-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jaya Gopal Meher, Magdaline Tarai, Ansuman Patnaik, Paresh Mishra, Narayan Prasad Yadav

Abstract

The present study aimed to develop buccoadhesive film of glimepiride with unique combination of polymers and to investigate its effect(s) on physicomechanical parameters, drug-release, and permeation of films. Drug-polymer interaction was examined by FTIR and DSC analysis. Films were prepared by solvent casting technique and characterized for film strength (320 ± 8.5 g, 28.98 ± 2.00 mJ), buccoadhesive strength (28.8 ± 1.37 g, 3.04 ± 0.32 mJ), and tensile strength (260 ± 6.88 g, 18.00 ± 0.44 mJ) by new instrumental techniques. Increase in polymer concentration augmented zeta potential of polymeric matrix-mucin mixture and exhibited strong buccoadhesion (electrical theory). Buccoadhesion was also influenced by particle size (adsorption theory) and swelling (wetting theory). Erosion behavior of films was observed in swelling and SEM studies. Film GM4 exhibited 98 ± 2% in vitro drug release and 85 ± 8% ex vivo drug permeation in 12 h with controlled diffusion mechanism. Films were compatible with oral probiotic microorganisms. Stability studies revealed no significant (P < 0.05) variation in physicomechanical characteristics.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 9 53%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Unknown 10 59%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 09 October 2015.
All research outputs
#4,180,871
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from AAPS PharmSciTech
#156
of 1,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,236
of 278,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AAPS PharmSciTech
#8
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,468 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 278,745 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 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 55% of its contemporaries.