↓ Skip to main content

Establishing an EU-China consortium on traditional Chinese medicine research

Overview of attention for article published in Chinese Medicine, December 2010
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Establishing an EU-China consortium on traditional Chinese medicine research
Published in
Chinese Medicine, December 2010
DOI 10.1186/1749-8546-5-42
Pubmed ID
Authors

Halil Uzuner, Tai-Ping Fan, Alberto Dias, De-an Guo, Hani S El-Nezami, Qihe Xu

Abstract

Traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is widely used in the European Union (EU) and attracts intense research interests from European scientists. As an emerging area in Europe, TCM research requires collaboration and coordination of actions. Good Practice in Traditional Chinese Medicine Research in the Post-genomic Era, also known as GP-TCM, is the first ever EU-funded 7th Framework Programme (FP7) coordination action, aiming to inform the best practice and harmonise research on the safety and efficacy of TCM through interdisciplinary exchange of experience and expertise among clinicians and scientists. With its increasingly large pool of expertise across 19 countries including 13 EU member states, Australia, Canada, China, Norway, Thailand and the USA, the consortium provides forums and collaboration platforms on quality control, extraction technology, component analysis, toxicology, pharmacology and regulatory issues of Chinese herbal medicine (CHM), as well as on acupuncture studies, with a particular emphasis on the application of a functional genomics approach. The project officially started in May 2009 and by the time of its conclusion in April 2012 a Europe-based academic society dedicated to TCM research will be founded to carry on the mission of GP-TCM.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 20%
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Student > Master 3 10%
Researcher 2 7%
Student > Postgraduate 2 7%
Other 6 20%
Unknown 6 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 23%
Social Sciences 3 10%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 July 2011.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Medicine
#517
of 660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,192
of 190,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Medicine
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 190,994 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.