↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Toxic effects of the interaction of titanium dioxide nanoparticles with chemicals or physical factors

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
Title
Toxic effects of the interaction of titanium dioxide nanoparticles with chemicals or physical factors
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2013
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s46919
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jinshun Zhao, Kui Liu, Xialu Lin

Abstract

Due to their chemical stability and nonallergic, nonirritant, and ultraviolet protective properties, titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles (NPs) have been widely used in industries such as electronics, optics, and material sciences, as well as architecture, medicine, and pharmacology. However, increasing concerns have been raised in regards to its ecotoxicity and toxicity on the aquatic environment as well as to humans. Although insights have been gained into the effects of TiO2 NPs on susceptible biological systems, there is still much ground to be covered, particularly in respect of our knowledge of the effects of the interaction of TiO2 NPs with other chemicals or physical factors. Studies suggest that interactions of TiO2 NPs with other chemicals or physical factors may result in an increase in toxicity or adverse effects. This review highlights recent progress in the study of the interactive effects of TiO2 NPs with other chemicals or physical factors.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 1%
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 84 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 28%
Student > Master 19 22%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Researcher 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 14 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 22%
Chemistry 16 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 8%
Environmental Science 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 15 17%

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 January 2020.
All research outputs
#4,424,876
of 16,614,363 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#350
of 3,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,734
of 162,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#18
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,614,363 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,039 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 162,104 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.