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 |
Laser Nano-Neurosurgery from Gentle Manipulation to Nano-Incision of Neuronal Cells and Scaffolds: An Advanced Neurotechnology Tool
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnins.2016.00101 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alessandro Soloperto, Gemma Palazzolo, Hanako Tsushima, Evelina Chieregatti, Massimo Vassalli, Francesco Difato |
| Abstract |
Current optical approaches are progressing far beyond the scope of monitoring the structure and function of living matter, and they are becoming widely recognized as extremely precise, minimally-invasive, contact-free handling tools. Laser manipulation of living tissues, single cells, or even single-molecules is becoming a well-established methodology, thus founding the onset of new experimental paradigms and research fields. Indeed, a tightly focused pulsed laser source permits complex tasks such as developing engineered bioscaffolds, applying calibrated forces, transfecting, stimulating, or even ablating single cells with subcellular precision, and operating intracellular surgical protocols at the level of single organelles. In the present review, we report the state of the art of laser manipulation in neuroscience, to inspire future applications of light-assisted tools in nano-neurosurgery. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 8 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 16% |
| Engineering | 5 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 13% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 26% |
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 06 January 2024.
All research outputs
#14,914,476
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#6,086
of 11,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,902
of 314,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#85
of 171 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,538 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. 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 314,374 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 171 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.