↓ Skip to main content

Acute and chronic animal models for the evaluation of anti-diabetic agents

Overview of attention for article published in Cardiovascular Diabetology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
218 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
Acute and chronic animal models for the evaluation of anti-diabetic agents
Published in
Cardiovascular Diabetology, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1475-2840-11-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suresh Kumar, Rajeshwar Singh, Neeru Vasudeva, Sunil Sharma

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus is a potentially morbid condition with high prevalence worldwide thus being a major medical concern. Experimental induction of diabetes mellitus in animal models is essential for the advancement of our knowledge and understanding of the various aspects of its pathogenesis and ultimately finding new therapies and cure. Experimental diabetes mellitus is generally induced in laboratory animals by several methods that include: chemical, surgical and genetic (immunological) manipulations. Most of the experiments in diabetes are carried out in rodents, although some studies are still performed in larger animals. The present review highlights the various methods of inducing diabetes in experimental animals in order to test the newer drugs for their anti-diabetic potential.

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 218 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ghana 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Estonia 1 <1%
Unknown 211 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 14%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Researcher 20 9%
Lecturer 14 6%
Other 36 17%
Unknown 64 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 22 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 2%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 67 31%
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 15 November 2020.
All research outputs
#16,580,596
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#989
of 1,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,891
of 251,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiovascular Diabetology
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,653 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 251,410 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.