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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Nanomaterials modulate stem cell differentiation: biological interaction and underlying mechanisms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nanobiotechnology, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12951-017-0310-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Min Wei, Song Li, Weidong Le |
| Abstract |
Stem cells are unspecialized cells that have the potential for self-renewal and differentiation into more specialized cell types. The chemical and physical properties of surrounding microenvironment contribute to the growth and differentiation of stem cells and consequently play crucial roles in the regulation of stem cells' fate. Nanomaterials hold great promise in biological and biomedical fields owing to their unique properties, such as controllable particle size, facile synthesis, large surface-to-volume ratio, tunable surface chemistry, and biocompatibility. Over the recent years, accumulating evidence has shown that nanomaterials can facilitate stem cell proliferation and differentiation, and great effort is undertaken to explore their possible modulating manners and mechanisms on stem cell differentiation. In present review, we summarize recent progress in the regulating potential of various nanomaterials on stem cell differentiation and discuss the possible cell uptake, biological interaction and underlying mechanisms. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 124 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 13% |
| Researcher | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 30 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 16% |
| Materials Science | 11 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 9% |
| Engineering | 10 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 25 | 20% |
| Unknown | 39 | 31% |
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 12 February 2020.
All research outputs
#7,542,164
of 23,009,818 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#295
of 1,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,428
of 327,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,009,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,438 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 327,865 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 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.