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 |
Advances in Glioblastoma Multiforme Treatment: New Models for Nanoparticle Therapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2018.00170 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elif Ozdemir-Kaynak, Amina A. Qutub, Ozlem Yesil-Celiktas |
| Abstract |
The most lethal form of brain cancer, glioblastoma multiforme, is characterized by rapid growth and invasion facilitated by cell migration and degradation of the extracellular matrix. Despite technological advances in surgery and radio-chemotherapy, glioblastoma remains largely resistant to treatment. New approaches to study glioblastoma and to design optimized therapies are greatly needed. One such approach harnesses computational modeling to support the design and delivery of glioblastoma treatment. In this paper, we critically summarize current glioblastoma therapy, with a focus on emerging nanomedicine and therapies that capitalize on cell-specific signaling in glioblastoma. We follow this summary by discussing computational modeling approaches focused on optimizing these emerging nanotherapeutics for brain cancer. We conclude by illustrating how mathematical analysis can be used to compare the delivery of a high potential anticancer molecule, delphinidin, in both free and nanoparticle loaded forms across the blood-brain barrier for glioblastoma. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 33% |
| United States | 2 | 33% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 294 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 294 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 56 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 56 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 46 | 16% |
| Researcher | 17 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 25 | 9% |
| Unknown | 82 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 54 | 18% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 29 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 8% |
| Engineering | 23 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 7% |
| Other | 55 | 19% |
| Unknown | 90 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 16 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,027,665
of 25,459,177 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,240
of 15,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,095
of 348,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#100
of 415 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,459,177 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,662 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 348,912 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 415 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.