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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Dynamic Regulation of the Endocannabinoid System: Implications for Analgesia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Pain, January 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1744-8069-5-59 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Devi Rani Sagar, A Gemma Gaw, Bright N Okine, Stephen G Woodhams, Amy Wong, David A Kendall, Victoria Chapman |
| Abstract |
The analgesic effects of cannabinoids are well documented, but these are often limited by psychoactive side-effects. Recent studies indicate that the endocannabinoid system is dynamic and altered under different pathological conditions, including pain states. Changes in this receptor system include altered expression of receptors, differential synthetic pathways for endocannabinoids are expressed by various cell types, multiple pathways of catabolism and the generation of biologically active metabolites, which may be engaged under different conditions. This review discusses the evidence that pain states alter the endocannabinoid receptor system at key sites involved in pain processing and how these changes may inform the development of cannabinoid-based analgesics. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 110 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Professor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 22% |
| Unknown | 21 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 25 | 22% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 23 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 December 2014.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Pain
#477
of 669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,713
of 183,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Pain
#20
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 183,286 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.