↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Gadolinium3+-doped mesoporous silica nanoparticles as a potential magnetic resonance tracer for monitoring the migration of stem cells in vivo

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, January 2013
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 (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 Mendeley
Title
Gadolinium3+-doped mesoporous silica nanoparticles as a potential magnetic resonance tracer for monitoring the migration of stem cells in vivo
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, January 2013
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s38213
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yingying Shen, Yuanzhi Shao, Haoqiang He, Yunpu Tan, Xiumei Tian, Fukang Xie, Li Li

Abstract

We investigated the tracking potential of a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) probe made of gadolinium-doped mesoporous silica MCM-41 (Gd(2)O(3)@MCM-41) nanoparticles for transplanted bone mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) and neural stem cells (NSCs) in vivo. The nanoparticles, synthesized using a one-step synthetic method, possess hexagonal mesoporous structures with appropriate assembly of nanoscale Gd(2)O(3) clusters. They show little cytotoxicity against proliferation and have a lower effect on the inherent differentiation potential of these labeled stem cells. The tracking of labeled NSCs in murine brains was dynamically determined with a clinical 3T MRI system for at least 14 days. The migration of labeled NSCs identified by MRI corresponded to the results of immunofluorescence imaging. Our study confirms that Gd(2)O(3)@MCM-41 particles can serve as an ideal vector for long-term MRI tracking of MSCs and NSCs in vivo.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Belgium 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 23%
Chemistry 5 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Materials Science 3 10%
Engineering 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 November 2023.
All research outputs
#7,355,485
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#814
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,739
of 288,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#12
of 64 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 288,986 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 64 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.