↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Visible-light-responsive ZnCuO nanoparticles: benign photodynamic killers of infectious protozoans

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Visible-light-responsive ZnCuO nanoparticles: benign photodynamic killers of infectious protozoans
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2015
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s91666
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samina Nazir, Malik Ihsanullah Khan, Atiyya Ayub, Bakhtiar Muhammad, Momin Khan, Dilawar Farhan Shams, Masoom Yasinzai, Akhtar Nadhman

Abstract

Human beings suffer from several infectious agents such as viruses, bacteria, and protozoans. Recently, there has been a great interest in developing biocompatible nanostructures to deal with infectious agents. This study investigated benign ZnCuO nanostructures that were visible-light-responsive due to the resident copper in the lattice. The nanostructures were synthesized through a size-controlled hot-injection process, which was adaptable to the surface ligation processes. The nanostructures were then characterized through transmission electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, diffused reflectance spectroscopy, Rutherford backscattering, and photoluminescence analysis to measure crystallite nature, size, luminescence, composition, and band-gap analyses. Antiprotozoal efficiency of the current nanoparticles revealed the photodynamic killing of Leishmania protozoan, thus acting as efficient metal-based photosensitizers. The crystalline nanoparticles showed good biocompatibility when tested for macrophage toxicity and in hemolysis assays. The study opens a wide avenue for using toxic material in resident nontoxic forms as an effective antiprotozoal treatment.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Researcher 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 12%
Chemistry 4 12%
Materials Science 3 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 8 24%

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 05 November 2015.
All research outputs
#2,899,514
of 6,534,476 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#608
of 1,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,829
of 209,382 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#79
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,534,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 52nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,596 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 209,382 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 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.