↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Robotic voltammetry with carbon nanotube-based sensors: a superb blend for convenient high-quality antimicrobial trace analysis

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Robotic voltammetry with carbon nanotube-based sensors: a superb blend for convenient high-quality antimicrobial trace analysis
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, January 2015
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s75237
Pubmed ID
Authors

Albert Schulte, Somjai Theanponkrang, Wipa Suginta, Helge Weingart, Mathias Winterhalter

Abstract

A new automated pharmacoanalytical technique for convenient quantification of redox-active antibiotics has been established by combining the benefits of a carbon nanotube (CNT) sensor modification with electrocatalytic activity for analyte detection with the merits of a robotic electrochemical device that is capable of sequential nonmanual sample measurements in 24-well microtiter plates. Norfloxacin (NFX) and ciprofloxacin (CFX), two standard fluoroquinolone antibiotics, were used in automated calibration measurements by differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) and accomplished were linear ranges of 1-10 μM and 2-100 μM for NFX and CFX, respectively. The lowest detectable levels were estimated to be 0.3±0.1 μM (n=7) for NFX and 1.6±0.1 μM (n=7) for CFX. In standard solutions or tablet samples of known content, both analytes could be quantified with the robotic DPV microtiter plate assay, with recoveries within ±4% of 100%. And recoveries were as good when NFX was evaluated in human serum samples with added NFX. The use of simple instrumentation, convenience in execution, and high effectiveness in analyte quantitation suggest the merger between automated microtiter plate voltammetry and CNT-supported electrochemical drug detection as a novel methodology for antibiotic testing in pharmaceutical and clinical research and quality control laboratories.

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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor 5 28%
Researcher 3 17%
Other 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 5 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 4 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 February 2015.
All research outputs
#9,957,217
of 12,438,331 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,920
of 2,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,357
of 302,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#26
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,438,331 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 302,548 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.