↓ Skip to main content

Delivering Nucleic‐Acid Based Nanomedicines on Biomaterial Scaffolds for Orthopedic Tissue Repair: Challenges, Progress and Future Perspectives

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Delivering Nucleic‐Acid Based Nanomedicines on Biomaterial Scaffolds for Orthopedic Tissue Repair: Challenges, Progress and Future Perspectives
Published in
Advanced Materials, February 2016
DOI 10.1002/adma.201505088
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosanne M Raftery, David P Walsh, Irene Mencía Castaño, Andreas Heise, Garry P Duffy, Sally-Ann Cryan, Fergal J O'Brien

Abstract

As well as acting to fill defects and allow for cell infiltration and proliferation in regenerative medicine, biomaterial scaffolds can also act as carriers for therapeutics, further enhancing their efficacy. Drug and protein delivery on scaffolds have shown potential, however, supraphysiological quantities of therapeutic are often released at the defect site, causing off-target side effects and cytotoxicity. Gene therapy involves the introduction of foreign genes into a cell in order to exert an effect; either replacing a missing gene or modulating expression of a protein. State of the art gene therapy also encompasses manipulation of the transcriptome by harnessing RNA interference (RNAi) therapy. The delivery of nucleic acid nanomedicines on biomaterial scaffolds - gene-activated scaffolds -has shown potential for use in a variety of tissue engineering applications, but as of yet, have not reached clinical use. The current state of the art in terms of biomaterial scaffolds and delivery vector materials for gene therapy is reviewed, and the limitations of current procedures discussed. Future directions in the clinical translation of gene-activated scaffolds are also considered, with a particular focus on bone and cartilage tissue regeneration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 98 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 26%
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Postgraduate 7 7%
Lecturer 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 26 26%
Unknown 14 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Materials Science 18 18%
Engineering 12 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 11%
Chemistry 10 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Other 22 22%
Unknown 20 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,924,719
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from Advanced Materials
#6,435
of 16,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,493
of 406,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advanced Materials
#93
of 177 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 406,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 177 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.