Biophysical interactions between pancreatic cancer cells and pristine carbon nanotube substrates: Potential application for pancreatic cancer tissue engineering

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Part B: Applied Biomaterials, October 2017

Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter: 7 X users

Readers on

mendeley: 35 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.

Article details
Title	Biophysical interactions between pancreatic cancer cells and pristine carbon nanotube substrates: Potential application for pancreatic cancer tissue engineering
Published in	Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Part B: Applied Biomaterials, October 2017
DOI	10.1002/jbm.b.34012
Pubmed ID	28976640
Authors	Brigitta Matta‐Domjan, Alice King, Stella Totti, Csaba Matta, George Dover, Patricia Martinez, Anvar Zakhidov, Roberto La Ragione, Hugo Macedo, Izabela Jurewicz, Alan Dalton, Eirini G. Velliou
Abstract	Novel synthetic biomaterials able to support direct tissue growth and retain cellular phenotypical properties are promising building blocks for the development of tissue engineering platforms for accurate and fast therapy screening for cancer. The aim of this study is to validate an aligned, pristine multi-walled carbon nanotube (CNT) platform for in vitro studies of pancreatic cancer as a systematic understanding of interactions between cells and these CNT substrates is lacking. Our results demonstrate that our CNT scaffolds-which are easily tuneable to form sheets/fibers-support growth, proliferation, and spatial organization of pancreatic cancer cells, indicating their great potential in cancer tissue engineering. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 2017.

View on publisher site Alert me about new mentions

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline

Activity

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country	Count	As %
United Kingdom	5	71%
Australia	1	14%
Unknown	1	14%

Demographic breakdown

Type
Type	Count	As %
Members of the public	5	71%
Scientists	2	29%

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country	Count	As %
Unknown	35	100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status	Count	As %
Student > Ph. D. Student	8	23%
Student > Bachelor	4	11%
Student > Master	4	11%
Researcher	2	6%
Professor	1	3%
Other	0	0%
Unknown	16	46%

Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline	Count	As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology	8	23%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science	2	6%
Materials Science	2	6%
Engineering	2	6%
Chemical Engineering	1	3%
Other	4	11%
Unknown	16	46%

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 05 October 2017.

All research outputs

#10,236,869

of 34,372,222 outputs

Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Part B: Applied Biomaterials

#509

of 1,738 outputs

Outputs of similar age

#115,511

of 361,613 outputs

Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, Part B: Applied Biomaterials

of 23 outputs

Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.

So far Altmetric has tracked 1,738 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 361,613 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 67% of its contemporaries.

We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.