↓ Skip to main content

An in vitro study of neuroprotective properties of traditional Chinese herbal medicines thought to promote healthy ageing and longevity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 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
An in vitro study of neuroprotective properties of traditional Chinese herbal medicines thought to promote healthy ageing and longevity
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-13-373
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bojiang Shen, John Truong, Ray Helliwell, Suresh Govindaraghavan, Nikolaus J Sucher

Abstract

Age is the leading risk factor for acute and chronic neurodegenerative diseases. The Shen Nong Ben Cao Jing, the oldest known compendium of Chinese materia media, lists herbal medicines that were believed to exert neither fast acting pharmacological effects nor discernible toxicity, but to promote general health and longevity. In modern terms, these herbal medicines could be considered as complementary health care products for prevention rather than treatment of diseases. In the present study, we examined whether a selection of 13 such herbal medicines exhibited neuroprotective activity.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 2 5%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 38 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 20%
Researcher 5 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 12%
Student > Master 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 12 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Chemistry 2 5%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 17 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 March 2019.
All research outputs
#14,490,850
of 23,223,705 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#1,709
of 3,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,079
of 308,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#50
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,223,705 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,675 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 308,247 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.