↓ Skip to main content

Polyhydroxyalkanoate/carbon nanotube nanocomposites: flexible electrically conducting elastomers for neural applications

Overview of attention for article published in Nanomedicine, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

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.
Title
Polyhydroxyalkanoate/carbon nanotube nanocomposites: flexible electrically conducting elastomers for neural applications
Published in
Nanomedicine, October 2016
DOI 10.2217/nnm-2016-0075
Pubmed ID
Authors

Catalina Vallejo-Giraldo, Eugenia Pugliese, Aitor Larrañaga, Marc A Fernandez-Yague, James J Britton, Alexandre Trotier, Ghazal Tadayyon, Adriona Kelly, Ilaria Rago, Jose-Ramon Sarasua, Eilís Dowd, Leo R Quinlan, Abhay Pandit, Manus JP Biggs

Abstract

Medium chain length-polyhydroxyalkanoate/multi-walled carbon nanotube (MWCNTs) nanocomposites with a range of mechanical and electrochemical properties were fabricated via assisted dispersion and solvent casting, and their suitability as neural interface biomaterials was investigated. Mechanical and electrical properties of medium chain length-polyhydroxyalkanoate/MWCNTs nanocomposite films were evaluated by tensile test and electrical impedance spectroscopy, respectively. Primary rat mesencephalic cells were seeded on the composites and quantitative immunostaining of relevant neural biomarkers, and electrical stimulation studies were performed. Incorporation of MWCNTs to the polymeric matrix modulated the mechanical and electrical properties of resulting composites, and promoted differential cell viability, morphology and function as a function of MWCNT concentration. This study demonstrates the feasibility of a green thermoplastic MWCNTs nanocomposite for potential use in neural interfacing applications.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

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.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 26%
Unspecified 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 8 23%
Unspecified 7 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 17%
Materials Science 5 14%
Chemistry 3 9%
Other 6 17%

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 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#10,221,314
of 12,801,967 outputs
Outputs from Nanomedicine
#561
of 793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#203,448
of 270,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nanomedicine
#13
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,801,967 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 793 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 270,984 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.