ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021
Assessment of the Toxicity of Quantum Dots through Biliometric Analysis.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity activities of natural products: therapeutic potential in Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Quantum Dot-Based Luminescent Sensors: Review from Analytical Perspective.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Understanding Antibiotic Detection with Fluorescence Quantum Dots: A Review.Journal of fluorescence · 2025Review
- Recent Advances in HPV Detection: From Traditional Methods to Nanotechnology and the Application of Quantum Dots.International journal of nanomedicine · 2025Review
- Quantum Dot-based Bio-conjugates as an Emerging Bioimaging Tool for Cancer Theranostic- A Review.Current drug targets · 2024Review
- Interactions between Quantum Dots and G-Actin.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Nanoparticles and Nanomaterials-Based Recent Approaches in Upgraded Targeting and Management of Cancer: A Review.Cancers · 2022Review
- An Investigation into Art Therapy Aided Health and Well-Being Research: A 75-Year Bibliometric Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Along with the rapid development of nanotechnology, the biosafety of quantum dots (QDs), a widely used kind of nanoparticles, has grabbed the attentions of researchers, because QDs have excellent and unique optical properties that other commonly used nanoparticles, like walled carbon nanotubes, do not have. The understanding of the toxicity of QDs is an important premise for their application in wider fields, including biology and medicine. This study sought to analyze scientific publications on the toxicity of QDs and to construct a bibliometric model for qualitative and quantitative evaluation of these publications over the past decade, which visually presented the status quo and future development trend on the toxicological study of QDs. A search for data using the triple blind method revealed that, as of 31 December 2018, there were 5269 papers published on the toxicity of QDs. RSC ADVANCES (5-year IF, 3.096) ranked first in the number of publications. China had the largest number of publications (2233) and the highest H-index (119), but the United States was still the leading country with regards to the quality of the research. LIU Y (106 publications) published the most papers, while Hardman R (304 co-citations) had the most co-citations. The keyword "walled carbon nanotube" ranked first in the research frontier. The findings not only determine a development trend of the toxicological study of QDs, but also identify further research directions in this field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.