| Title |
Dissolving and biodegradable microneedle technologies for transdermal sustained delivery of drug and vaccine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s44401 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaoyun Hong, Liangming Wei, Fei Wu, Zaozhan Wu, Lizhu Chen, Zhenguo Liu, Weien Yuan |
| Abstract |
Microneedles were first conceptualized for drug delivery many decades ago, overcoming the shortages and preserving the advantages of hypodermic needle and conventional transdermal drug-delivery systems to some extent. Dissolving and biodegradable microneedle technologies have been used for transdermal sustained deliveries of different drugs and vaccines. This review describes microneedle geometry and the representative dissolving and biodegradable microneedle delivery methods via the skin, followed by the fabricating methods. Finally, this review puts forward some perspectives that require further investigation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 306 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 303 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 57 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 39 | 13% |
| Researcher | 24 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 38 | 12% |
| Unknown | 82 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 59 | 19% |
| Engineering | 45 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 16 | 5% |
| Other | 47 | 15% |
| Unknown | 96 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 25 September 2020.
All research outputs
#5,288,711
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#348
of 2,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,145
of 212,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#5
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,270 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 212,554 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.