↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Nanotherapeutics in the EU: an overview on current state and future directions

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
148 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
253 Mendeley
Title
Nanotherapeutics in the EU: an overview on current state and future directions
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, February 2014
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s55359
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ivan Pepic, Anita Hafner, Jasmina Lovric, Gorana Perina Lakos

Abstract

The application of nanotechnology in areas of drug delivery and therapy (ie, nanotherapeutics) is envisioned to have a great impact on public health. The ability of nanotherapeutics to provide targeted drug delivery, improve drug solubility, extend drug half-life, improve a drug's therapeutic index, and reduce a drug's immunogenicity has resulted in the potential to revolutionize the treatment of many diseases. In this paper, we review the liposome-, nanocrystal-, virosome-, polymer therapeutic-, nanoemulsion-, and nanoparticle-based approaches to nanotherapeutics, which represent the most successful and commercialized categories within the field of nanomedicine. We discuss the regulatory pathway and initiatives endeavoring to ensure the safe and timely clinical translation of emerging nanotherapeutics and realization of health care benefits. Emerging trends are expected to confirm that this nano-concept can exert a macro-impact on patient benefits, treatment options, and the EU economy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 253 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 244 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 57 23%
Student > Master 45 18%
Researcher 36 14%
Student > Bachelor 33 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 40 16%
Unknown 30 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 56 22%
Chemistry 36 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 6%
Other 40 16%
Unknown 42 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 27 November 2019.
All research outputs
#4,251,613
of 16,281,807 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#339
of 3,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,073
of 190,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#7
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,281,807 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 3,013 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 190,418 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 104 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.