You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effects of differently shaped TiO2NPs (nanospheres, nanorods and nanowires) on the in vitro model (Caco-2/HT29) of the intestinal barrier
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Particle and Fibre Toxicology, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12989-018-0269-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alba García-Rodríguez, Laura Vila, Constanza Cortés, Alba Hernández, Ricard Marcos |
| Abstract |
The biological effects of nanoparticles depend on several characteristics such as size and shape that must be taken into account in any type of assessment. The increased use of titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2NPs) for industrial applications, and specifically as a food additive, demands a deep assessment of their potential risk for humans, including their abilities to cross biological barriers. We have investigated the interaction of three differently shaped TiO2NPs (nanospheres, nanorods and nanowires) in an in vitro model of the intestinal barrier, where the coculture of Caco-2/HT29 cells confers inherent intestinal epithelium characteristics to the model (i.e. mucus secretion, brush border, tight junctions, etc.). Adverse effects in the intestinal epithelium were detected by studying the barrier's integrity (TEER), permeability (LY) and changes in the gene expression of selected specific markers. Using Laser Scanning Confocal Microscopy, we detected a different behaviour in the bio-adhesion and biodistribution of each of the TiO2NPs. Moreover, we were able to specifically localize each type of TiO2NPs inside the cells. Interestingly, general DNA damage, but not oxidative DNA damage effects, were detected by using the FPG version of the comet assay. Results indicate different interactions and cellular responses related to differently shaped TiO2NPs, nanowires showing the most harmful effects. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 73 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 18% |
| Unknown | 26 | 36% |
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 08 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,529,980
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#466
of 564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,657
of 330,798 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Particle and Fibre Toxicology
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 564 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 330,798 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.