| Title |
Clinical implications of calcifying nanoparticles in dental diseases: a critical review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s51538 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mohammed S Alenazy, Hezekiah A Mosadomi |
| Abstract |
Unknown cell-culture contaminants were described by Kajander and Ciftçioğlu in 1998. These contaminants were called nanobacteria initially and later calcifying nanoparticles (CNPs). Their exact nature is unclear and controversial. CNPs have unique and unusual characteristics, which preclude placing them into any established evolutionary branch of life. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 38 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 15% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 49% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 26% |
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 10 December 2013.
All research outputs
#16,721,208
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,088
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,826
of 320,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#52
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 320,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.