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 |
Potential applications of nanotechnology for the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2014.00002 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joshua McCarroll, Joann Teo, Cyrille Boyer, David Goldstein, Maria Kavallaris, Phoebe A. Phillips |
| Abstract |
Despite improvements in our understanding of pancreatic cancer and the emerging concept of personalized medicine for the treatment of this disease, it is still the fourth most common cause of cancer death in the western world. It is established that pancreatic cancer is a highly heterogeneous disease with a complex tumor microenvironment. Indeed the extensive stroma surrounding the cancer cells has been shown to be important in promoting tumor growth and metastases, as well as sequestering chemotherapeutic agents consequently decreasing delivery to the tumor cells. Nanotechnology has come to the forefront in the areas of medical diagnostics, imaging, and therapeutic drug delivery. This review will focus on the potential applications of nanotechnology for diagnosis, imaging, and delivery of therapeutic agents for the treatment of pancreatic cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Egypt | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 15% |
| Researcher | 16 | 15% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 10 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 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 11 June 2014.
All research outputs
#18,360,179
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,080
of 13,539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,335
of 305,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#70
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 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 13,539 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 305,211 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 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.