Nanomaterials for Neural Interfaces

By Nicholas A. Kotov, J. Winter, I. Clements, E. Jan, Brian P. Timko, S. Campidelli, S. Pathak, A. Mazzatenta, Charles M. Lieber, M. Prato and 5 more. 2009

481 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Electrical and Electronic Engineering

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/28561c0121d40be53cf969922f29d9a59f732482

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience

1. Mikhail A. Lebedev
2. Miguel A. L. Nicolelis
3. Mehdi Jorfi
4. Jeffrey R. Capadona
5. Christoph Weder
6. John Skousen
7. Robert Langer
8. Brian P. Timko

In Electrical and Electronic Engineering

1. Miguel A. L. Nicolelis
2. Robert Langer
3. Mikhail A. Lebedev
4. Brian P. Timko
5. Tal Dvir
6. Daniel S. Kohane

Citations in the corpus

• Brain-Machine Interfaces: From Basic Science to Neuroprostheses and Neurorehabilitation. (2017, background): “Overall, nanomaterials are a promising research area because they can provide better biocompatibility (66, 433, 446), spatial resolution (215, 799), and electrical properties (32, 118).”
• Progress Towards Biocompatible Intracortical Microelectrodes for Neural Interfacing Applications (2014, background): “(327, 328) Perhaps most importantly, nanomaterials can interact with biological systems with a high degree of specificity, are able to stimulate and interact with target cells with minimizing undesirable effects, and the electronic properties of nanostructures can be tailored to match the needs asso”
• Nanotechnological strategies for engineering complex tissues (2010, methodology): “Cardiac cells were cultured on polyethylene glycol hydrogel grooved arrays with ridge (groove) widths ranging from 150 (50) to 800 (800) nm.”