| Title |
Nanomedicine concepts in the general medical curriculum: initiating a discussion
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s96480 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aldrin E Sweeney |
| Abstract |
Various applications of nanoscale science to the field of medicine have resulted in the ongoing development of the subfield of nanomedicine. Within the past several years, there has been a concurrent proliferation of academic journals, textbooks, and other professional literature addressing fundamental basic science research and seminal clinical developments in nanomedicine. Additionally, there is now broad consensus among medical researchers and practitioners that along with personalized medicine and regenerative medicine, nanomedicine is likely to revolutionize our definitions of what constitutes human disease and its treatment. In light of these developments, incorporation of key nanomedicine concepts into the general medical curriculum ought to be considered. Here, I offer for consideration five key nanomedicine concepts, along with suggestions regarding the manner in which they might be incorporated effectively into the general medical curriculum. Related curricular issues and implications for medical education also are presented. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 82 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 15% |
| Professor | 7 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 12% |
| Unknown | 18 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 16% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 11 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 9% |
| Materials Science | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 20% |
| Unknown | 22 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 December 2015.
All research outputs
#14,599,159
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,525
of 4,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,367
of 395,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#21
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,121 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 61% 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 395,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.