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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Cancer Cell Discrimination Using Host–Guest “Doubled” Arrays
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of the American Chemical Society, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1021/jacs.7b03657 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ngoc D. B. Le, Gulen Yesilbag Tonga, Rubul Mout, Sung-Tae Kim, Marcos E. Wille, Subinoy Rana, Karen A. Dunphy, D. Joseph Jerry, Mahdieh Yazdani, Rajesh Ramanathan, Caren M. Rotello, Vincent M. Rotello |
| Abstract |
We report a nanosensor that uses cell lysates to rapidly profile the tumorigenicity of cancer cells. This sensing platform uses host-guest interactions between cucurbit[7]uril (CB[7]) and the cationic headgroup of a gold nanoparticle (AuNP) to non-covalently modify the binding of three fluorescent proteins of a multichannel sensor in situ. This approach doubles the number of output channels to six, providing single-well identification of cell lysates with 100 % accuracy. Significantly, this classification could be extended beyond the training set, determining the invasiveness of novel cell lines. The unique fingerprint of these cell lysates required minimal sample quantity (200 ng, ~1000 cells), making the methodology compatible with microbiopsy technology. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 78 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 21% |
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 13% |
| Unknown | 20 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 30 | 38% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 9% |
| Materials Science | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 4 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Unknown | 23 | 29% |
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 31 March 2021.
All research outputs
#13,985,258
of 24,498,639 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Chemical Society
#54,469
of 64,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,150
of 320,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Chemical Society
#311
of 489 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,498,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 64,841 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 320,694 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 489 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.