↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

The interaction of sterically stabilized magnetic nanoparticles with fresh human red blood cells

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
The interaction of sterically stabilized magnetic nanoparticles with fresh human red blood cells
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, October 2015
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s93225
Pubmed ID
Authors

Binh TT Pham, Nirmesh Jain, Philip W Kuchel, Bogdan E Chapman, Stephanie A Bickley, Stephen K Jones, Brian S Hawkett

Abstract

Sterically stabilized superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) were incubated with fresh human erythrocytes (red blood cells [RBCs]) to explore their potential application as magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. The chemical shift and linewidth of (133)Cs(+) resonances from inside and outside the RBCs in (133)Cs nuclear magnetic resonance spectra were monitored as a function of time. Thus, we investigated whether SPIONs of two different core sizes and with three different types of polymeric stabilizers entered metabolically active RBCs, consuming glucose at 37°C. The SPIONs broadened the extracellular (133)Cs(+) nuclear magnetic resonance, and brought about a small change in its chemical shift to a higher frequency; while the intracellular resonance remained unchanged in both amplitude and chemical shift. This situation pertained over incubation times of up to 90 minutes. If the SPIONs had entered the RBCs, the intracellular resonance would have become broader and possibly even shifted. Therefore, we concluded that our SPIONs did not enter the RBCs. In addition, the T 2 relaxivity of the small and large particles was 368 and 953 mM(-1) s(-1), respectively (three and nine times that of the most effective commercially available samples). This suggests that these new SPIONs will provide a superior performance to any others reported thus far as magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

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 %
Researcher 5 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Professor 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Other 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 5 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 4 22%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,739,010
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,775
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#147,353
of 286,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#56
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 286,873 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.