Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30349242›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of nanomedicine2018

Nanotechnology, from quantum mechanical calculations up to drug delivery.

Beata Szefler

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of nanomedicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Covalent Organic Framework (CMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Beata SzeflerDepartment of Physical Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Collegium Medicum, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Bydgoszcz, Poland, beatas@cm.umk.pl.
Nicolaus Copernicus University · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are several reasons why nanotechnology is currently considered as the leader among the most intensively developing research trends. Nanomatter often exhibits new properties, other than those of the morphology of a continuous solid. Also, new phenomena appear at the nanoscale, which are unknown in the case of microcrystalline objects. For this reason, nanomaterials have already found numerous applications that are described in this review. However, among intensively developed various branches of nanotechnology, nanomedicine and pharmacology stand out particularly, which opens new possibilities for the development of these disciplines, gives great hope for the creation of new drugs in which toxicological properties are reduced to a minimum, reduces the doses of medicines, offers targeted treatment and increases diagnostic possibilities. Nanotechnology is the source of a great revolution in medicine. It gives great hope for better and faster treatment of many diseases and gives hope for a better tomorrow. However, the creation of new "nanodrugs" requires a special understanding of the properties of nanoparticles. This article is a review work which determines and describes the way of creating new nanodrugs from ab initio calculations by docking and molecular dynamic applications up to a new medicinal product, as a proposal for the personalized medicine, in the early future.

Indexed as

Quantum TheoryDrug Delivery SystemsFullerenesHumansNanoparticlesNanotechnologyTheranostic NanomedicineFullerenesab initiodrug deliveryfullerenesmolecular dynamicsnanoparticlespersonalized medicine

Identifiers

PMID30349242
PMCPMC6188196
OpenAlexW2894813378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.