↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Nanotoxicity: emerging concerns regarding nanomaterial safety and occupational hard metal (WC-Co) nanoparticle exposure

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Nanotoxicity: emerging concerns regarding nanomaterial safety and occupational hard metal (WC-Co) nanoparticle exposure
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, December 2016
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s121238
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea L Armstead, Bingyun Li

Abstract

As the number of commercial and consumer products containing engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) continually rises, the increased use and production of these ENMs presents an important toxicological concern. Although ENMs offer a number of advantages over traditional materials, their extremely small size and associated characteristics may also greatly enhance their toxic potentials. ENM exposure can occur in various consumer and industrial settings through inhalation, ingestion, or dermal routes. Although the importance of accurate ENM characterization, effective dosage metrics, and selection of appropriate cell or animal-based models are universally agreed upon as important factors in ENM research, at present, there is no "standardized" approach used to assess ENM toxicity in the research community. Of particular interest is occupational exposure to tungsten carbide cobalt (WC-Co) "dusts," composed of nano- and micro-sized particles, in hard metal manufacturing facilities and mining and drilling industries. Inhalation of WC-Co dust is known to cause "hard metal lung disease" and an increased risk of lung cancer; however, the mechanisms underlying WC-Co toxicity, the inflammatory disease state and progression to cancer are poorly understood. Herein, a discussion of ENM toxicity is followed by a review of the known literature regarding the effects of WC-Co particle exposure. The risk of WC-Co exposure in occupational settings and the updates of in vitro and in vivo studies of both micro- and nano-WC-Co particles are discussed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 10%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 13%
Chemistry 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 15 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 March 2020.
All research outputs
#3,841,930
of 15,799,061 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#317
of 2,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,813
of 389,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#6
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,799,061 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,983 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 389,279 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 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.