↓ Skip to main content

Nanoparticle-Based Systems for Delivery of Protein Therapeutics to the Spinal Cord

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Nanoparticle-Based Systems for Delivery of Protein Therapeutics to the Spinal Cord
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00484
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juan C. Infante

Abstract

Recent studies have demonstrated that delivery of protein therapeutics to the spinal cord may promote functional axon regeneration, providing a pathway for recovery of certain motor skills. The timeframe for delivery of protein therapeutics, however, must be modulated to prevent bulk release of the therapeutics and minimize the frequency of implantations. This perspective examines both affinity-based and nanoparticle-based strategies for delivery of neurotrophic factors (NFs) to the spinal cord in an effective, safe, and tunable manner.

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

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

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.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 24%
Other 2 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 12%
Student > Master 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 3 18%
Unknown 7 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,066,844
of 28,407,905 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,542
of 12,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,132
of 345,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#136
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,407,905 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,589 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 345,723 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.