↓ Skip to main content

Radiation mitigating properties of the lignan component in flaxseed

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
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.
Title
Radiation mitigating properties of the lignan component in flaxseed
Published in
BMC Cancer, April 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2407-13-179
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralph Pietrofesa, Jason Turowski, Sonia Tyagi, Floyd Dukes, Evguenia Arguiri, Theresa M Busch, Shannon M Gallagher-Colombo, Charalambos C Solomides, Keith A Cengel, Melpo Christofidou-Solomidou

Abstract

Wholegrain flaxseed (FS), and its lignan component (FLC) consisting mainly of secoisolariciresinol diglucoside (SDG), have potent lung radioprotective properties while not abrogating the efficacy of radiotherapy. However, while the whole grain was recently shown to also have potent mitigating properties in a thoracic radiation pneumonopathy model, the bioactive component in the grain responsible for the mitigation of lung damage was never identified. Lungs may be exposed to radiation therapeutically for thoracic malignancies or incidentally following detonation of a radiological dispersion device. This could potentially lead to pulmonary inflammation, oxidative tissue injury, and fibrosis. This study aimed to evaluate the radiation mitigating effects of FLC in a mouse model of radiation pneumonopathy.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 16%
Researcher 5 11%
Lecturer 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 10 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#6,925,573
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#1,831
of 8,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,618
of 199,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#30
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,259 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
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 199,688 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.