↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of the potential of a high frequency acoustomicrofluidic nebulisation platform for inhaled stem cell therapy

Overview of attention for article published in Integrative Biology, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Assessment of the potential of a high frequency acoustomicrofluidic nebulisation platform for inhaled stem cell therapy
Published in
Integrative Biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1039/c5ib00206k
Pubmed ID
Authors

Layla Alhasan, Aisha Qi, Amgad R. Rezk, Leslie Y. Yeo, Peggy P. Y. Chan

Abstract

Despite the promise of stem cell therapy for lung therapeutics and repair, there are few viable means for directly delivering stem cells to locally target the respiratory airways via inhalation. This is not surprising given the significant challenges in aerosolising stem cells, particularly given their susceptibility to damage under the large stresses involved in the nebulisation process. Here, we present promising results using a microfluidic acoustic nebulisation platform that is not only low cost and portable, but also its high MHz order frequencies are effective for preserving the structural and functional integrity of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) during the nebulisation process. This is verified through an assessment of the viability, structure, metabolic activity, proliferation ability and genetic makeup of the nebulised MSCs using a variety of assays, including cell viability staining, flow cytometry, reverse transcription and quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and immunophenotyping, thus demonstrating the platform as a promising method for efficient pulmonary stem cell delivery.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 38%
Student > Master 5 19%
Researcher 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Lecturer 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 13 50%
Materials Science 4 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Chemistry 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 December 2015.
All research outputs
#3,295,887
of 12,383,794 outputs
Outputs from Integrative Biology
#123
of 554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,517
of 329,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Integrative Biology
#12
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,383,794 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 554 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 329,322 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.