↓ Skip to main content

Recent Advances on Luminescent Enhancement-Based Porous Silicon Biosensors

Overview of attention for article published in Pharmaceutical Research, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Recent Advances on Luminescent Enhancement-Based Porous Silicon Biosensors
Published in
Pharmaceutical Research, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11095-016-1889-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. N. Aisyiyah Jenie, Sally E. Plush, Nicolas H. Voelcker

Abstract

Luminescence-based detection paradigms have key advantages over other optical platforms such as absorbance, reflectance or interferometric based detection. However, autofluorescence, low quantum yield and lack of photostability of the fluorophore or emitting molecule are still performance-limiting factors. Recent research has shown the need for enhanced luminescence-based detection to overcome these drawbacks while at the same time improving the sensitivity, selectivity and reducing the detection limits of optical sensors and biosensors. Nanostructures have been reported to significantly improve the spectral properties of the emitting molecules. These structures offer unique electrical, optic and magnetic properties which may be used to tailor the surrounding electrical field of the emitter. Here, the main principles behind luminescence and luminescence enhancement-based detections are reviewed, with an emphasis on europium complexes as the emitting molecule. An overview of the optical porous silicon microcavity (pSiMC) as a biosensing platform and recent proof-of-concept examples on enhanced luminescence-based detection using pSiMCs are provided and discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 2%
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 49 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 31%
Researcher 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Master 4 8%
Professor 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 7 14%
Chemistry 6 12%
Physics and Astronomy 5 10%
Materials Science 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 14 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,362,070
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Pharmaceutical Research
#2,235
of 2,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,887
of 298,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmaceutical Research
#27
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,857 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 298,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.