↓ Skip to main content

Clinical experience with intravenous administration of ascorbic acid: achievable levels in blood for different states of inflammation and disease in cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2013
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
13 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
57 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Clinical experience with intravenous administration of ascorbic acid: achievable levels in blood for different states of inflammation and disease in cancer patients
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, August 2013
DOI 10.1186/1479-5876-11-191
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nina Mikirova, Joseph Casciari, Neil Riordan, Ronald Hunninghake

Abstract

Ascorbic acid (vitamin C, ascorbate) is a key water soluble antioxidant that, when administered in doses well above its recommended dietary allowance, may have preventative and therapeutic value against a number of pathologies. The intravenous administration of high dose ascorbate (IVC) has increased in popularity among complementary and alternative medicine practitioners: thousands of patients received IVC, at an average dose of 0.5 g/kg, without significant side effects. While IVC may have a variety of possible applications, it has generated the most interest for its potential use in treating cancer.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Canada 2 2%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 99 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Master 15 14%
Other 10 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 27 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 41%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 5%
Psychology 3 3%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 27 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 17 January 2023.
All research outputs
#3,010,283
of 25,547,324 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#524
of 4,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,678
of 207,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#5
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,547,324 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 207,998 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.