↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

The physiology of cardiovascular disease and innovative liposomal platforms for therapy

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
The physiology of cardiovascular disease and innovative liposomal platforms for therapy
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, February 2013
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s30599
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rita Serda, Ruiz-Esparza, Jose Flores-Arredondo, Segura-Ibarra, Guillermo Torre, Blanco, M Ferrari

Abstract

Heart disease remains the major cause of death in males and females, emphasizing the need for novel strategies to improve patient treatment and survival. A therapeutic approach, still in its infancy, is the development of site-specific drug-delivery systems. Nanoparticle-based delivery systems, such as liposomes, have evolved into robust platforms for site-specific delivery of therapeutics. In this review, the clinical impact of cardiovascular disease and the pathophysiology of different subsets of the disease are described. Potential pathological targets for therapy are introduced, and promising advances in nanotherapeutic cardiovascular applications involving liposomal platforms are presented.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 11 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 17%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Chemistry 5 7%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 13 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 December 2013.
All research outputs
#7,498,530
of 12,438,331 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,088
of 2,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,799
of 146,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#21
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,438,331 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,456 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 146,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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.