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 |
Dusuqing granules (DSQ) suppress inflammation in Klebsiella pneumonia rat via NF-κB/MAPK signaling
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12906-017-1736-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xue Mei, Hao-Xun Wang, Jian-Sheng Li, Xiao-Hui Liu, Xiao-Fan Lu, Ya Li, Wei-Yu Zhang, Yan-Ge Tian |
| Abstract |
Dusuqing granules (DSQ) have been used in the treatment of bacterial pneumonia clinically, with remarkable benefits. This study was initiated to explore the effects of DSQ on pulmonary inflammation by regulating nuclear factor (NF)-κB/mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling in bacterial pneumonia rats. Rat model was duplicated with Klebsiella pneumonia by a one-time intratracheal injection. Rats were randomized into control, model, DSQ and levofloxacin (LVX) groups. After administrated with appropriate medicines for 7 days, lung tissues were harvested and prepared for pathological analysis, and interleukin (IL)-1, IL-6, monocyte chemotactic protein (MCP)-1and macrophage inflammatory protein (MIP)-2 detections. NF-κB mRNA was measured by real-time qPCR, and the phosphorylation and total proteins of P38MAPK, JNK46/54, ERK42/44 were determined by Western blotting. Marked pathological impairments were observed in model rats, whereas were improved in DSQ group. The cytokines levels, NF-κB mRNA expression and the phosphorylation of P38MAPK, JNK46/54 and ERK42/44 proteins were significantly higher in model group, and were significantly depressed in DSQ group. The protective effects of DSQ on Klebsiella pneumonia might be attributed to its inactivative effects of NF-κB/ MAPK pathway. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 | 50% |
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 33% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Librarian | 1 | 7% |
| Professor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 20% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 20% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
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 19 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,454,502
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#2,054
of 3,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,110
of 310,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#56
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,639 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 310,087 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.