Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30361809›Full record

ReviewNanoscale research letters2018

Insight into Cellular Uptake and Intracellular Trafficking of Nanoparticles.

Parisa Foroozandeh, Azlan Abdul Aziz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nanoscale research letters, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 520 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
520citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

520 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Analyzing Molecular Determinants of Nanodrugs' Cytotoxic Effects.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Starch-Coated Superparamagnetic FeNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

460 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Parisa ForoozandehSchool of Physics, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800, Gelugor, Penang, Malaysia. Parisa.forooz@gmail.com.
Azlan Abdul AzizSchool of Physics, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800, Gelugor, Penang, Malaysia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanoparticle science is rapidly changing the landscape of various scientific fields and defining new technological platforms. This is perhaps even more evident in the field of nanomedicine whereby nanoparticles have been used as a tool for the treatment and diagnosis of many diseases. However, despite the tremendous benefit conferred, common pitfalls of this technology is its potential short and long-term effects on the human body. To understand these issues, many scientific studies have been carried out. This review attempts to shed light on some of these studies and its outcomes. The topics that were examined in this review include the different possible uptake pathways of nanoparticles and intracellular trafficking routes. Additionally, the effect of physicochemical properties of nanoparticle such as size, shape, charge and surface chemistry in determining the mechanism of uptake and biological function of nanoparticles are also addressed.

Indexed as

Cellular uptakeCytotoxicityIntracellular traffickingNanomedicineNanoparticles

Identifiers

PMID30361809
PMCPMC6202307

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.