↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Conjugation of insulin onto the sidewalls of single-walled carbon nanotubes through functionalization and diimide-activated amidation

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
Title
Conjugation of insulin onto the sidewalls of single-walled carbon nanotubes through functionalization and diimide-activated amidation
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, April 2016
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s98726
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chee Meng Ng, Hwei-San Loh, Kasturi Muthoosamy, Nanthini Sridewi, Sivakumar Manickam

Abstract

The high aspect ratio of carbon nanotubes (CNTs) allows the attachment of compounds that enhance the functionality of the drug vehicle. Considering this, use of CNTs as a multifunctional insulin carrier may be an interesting prospect to explore. The carboxylic acid groups were functionalized on the sidewalls of single-walled CNTs (SWCNTs) followed by diimidation to form amide bonds with the amine groups of the insulin. Scanning transmission electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy establish clear conjugation of insulin onto the surface of nanotube sidewalls. The incorporation of insulin further increased the solubility of SWCNTs in biological solution for the tested period of 5 months. Bicinchoninic acid assay confirms that 0.42 mg of insulin could be attached to every 1 mg of carboxylated SWCNTs. With the successful conjugation of insulin to SWCNTs, it opens up the potential use of SWCNTs as an insulin carrier which in need of further biological studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 2 3%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 17 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 12 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Chemical Engineering 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 20 34%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 April 2016.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,470
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,049
of 314,725 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#93
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 314,725 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.