↓ Skip to main content

Benfotiamine, a synthetic S-acyl thiamine derivative, has different mechanisms of action and a different pharmacological profile than lipid-soluble thiamine disulfide derivatives

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pharmacology, June 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 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
Benfotiamine, a synthetic S-acyl thiamine derivative, has different mechanisms of action and a different pharmacological profile than lipid-soluble thiamine disulfide derivatives
Published in
BMC Pharmacology, June 2008
DOI 10.1186/1471-2210-8-10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie-Laure Volvert, Sandrine Seyen, Marie Piette, Brigitte Evrard, Marjorie Gangolf, Jean-Christophe Plumier, Lucien Bettendorff

Abstract

Lipid-soluble thiamine precursors have a much higher bioavailability than genuine thiamine and therefore are more suitable for therapeutic purposes. Benfotiamine (S-benzoylthiamine O-monophosphate), an amphiphilic S-acyl thiamine derivative, prevents the progression of diabetic complications, probably by increasing tissue levels of thiamine diphosphate and so enhancing transketolase activity. As the brain is particularly sensitive to thiamine deficiency, we wanted to test whether intracellular thiamine and thiamine phosphate levels are increased in the brain after oral benfotiamine administration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Serbia 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 93 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 21%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 8 8%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Other 22 23%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 11%
Chemistry 5 5%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 23 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 29 January 2023.
All research outputs
#3,602,989
of 24,417,958 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pharmacology
#9
of 63 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,578
of 85,633 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pharmacology
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,417,958 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 63 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 85,633 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.