↓ Skip to main content

Adding Functions to Biomaterial Surfaces through Protein Incorporation

Overview of attention for article published in Advanced Materials, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Adding Functions to Biomaterial Surfaces through Protein Incorporation
Published in
Advanced Materials, May 2016
DOI 10.1002/adma.201504310
Pubmed ID
Authors

Małgorzata A Wronska, Iain B O'Connor, Maura A Tilbury, Akshay Srivastava, J Gerard Wall

Abstract

The concept of biomaterials has evolved from one of inert mechanical supports with a long-term, biologically inactive role in the body into complex matrices that exhibit selective cell binding, promote proliferation and matrix production, and may ultimately become replaced by newly generated tissues in vivo. Functionalization of material surfaces with biomolecules is critical to their ability to evade immunorecognition, interact productively with surrounding tissues and extracellular matrix, and avoid bacterial colonization. Antibody molecules and their derived fragments are commonly immobilized on materials to mediate coating with specific cell types in fields such as stent endothelialization and drug delivery. The incorporation of growth factors into biomaterials has found application in promoting and accelerating bone formation in osteogenerative and related applications. Peptides and extracellular matrix proteins can impart biomolecule- and cell-specificities to materials while antimicrobial peptides have found roles in preventing biofilm formation on devices and implants. In this progress report, we detail developments in the use of diverse proteins and peptides to modify the surfaces of hard biomaterials in vivo and in vitro. Chemical approaches to immobilizing active biomolecules are presented, as well as platform technologies for isolation or generation of natural or synthetic molecules suitable for biomaterial functionalization.

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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 109 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 17%
Researcher 17 15%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 6 5%
Other 22 19%
Unknown 29 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Materials Science 13 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 12%
Engineering 13 12%
Chemistry 11 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 37 33%
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 11 August 2016.
All research outputs
#16,047,881
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Advanced Materials
#11,848
of 16,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,046
of 314,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advanced Materials
#145
of 191 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 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 16,282 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 314,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 191 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.