↓ Skip to main content

Ethnomedicinal plants used for digestive system disorders by the Karen of northern Thailand

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 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
Ethnomedicinal plants used for digestive system disorders by the Karen of northern Thailand
Published in
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13002-015-0011-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kornkanok Tangjitman, Chalobol Wongsawad, Kaweesin Kamwong, Treetip Sukkho, Chusie Trisonthi

Abstract

Digestive system disorders have a substantial effect on worldwide morbidity and mortality rates, including in Thailand, where the majority of the rural areas have a lack of proper sanitation and awareness about disease prevention. This has led to the prevalence of different types of digestive diseases. Karen people in Thailand still use medicinal plants as first aid remedies in treating these diseases. Therefore, this study aimed at documenting the plants used to cure and prevent different types of digestive system disorders by Karen people of Chiang Mai Province, northern Thailand. Ethnomedicinal data were collected from six key informants and 172 non-specialist informants regarding their traditional knowledge of medicinal plants. Quantitative approaches were used to determine Use Value (UV), Informant Consensus Factor (ICF) and Fidelity Level (FL) values. The study revealed that 36 medicinal plant species belonging to 31 genera and 24 families were used to treat digestive system disorders. The most prevalent plant families were Zingiberaceae (6 species), Euphorbiaceae (4 species) and Fabaceae (4 species). Leaves were the most commonly used plant part accounting for 32.6% of the plants, followed by the bark (18.6%). About 60% of the administrations were given orally by potion (60%) and consumption as food was also indicated (14%). The highest ICF values were recorded for carminative disorders, stomachaches, geographic tongue, constipation, appetite stimulants and food poisoning (1.00 each) indicating the best agreement among the informants knowledge of medicinal plants that were used to treat aliments in these categories. The highest fidelity level values were recorded for Punica granatum (100.00), Psidium guajava (95.45), and Gymnopetalum integrifolium (90.91) showing conformity of knowledge on species with the best healing potential. Medicinal plants still play an important role among Karen culture. The present information on these medicinal plants, which have high UV and FL values, may serve as the baseline data to initiate further research for the discovery of new compounds and the biological activities of these potential plant remedies. Further research on these plants may provide some important clues for the development of new drugs for the treatment of digestive system diseases.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 1 <1%
Unknown 144 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 22 15%
Student > Master 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 20 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Lecturer 8 6%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 36 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 23 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 10%
Chemistry 9 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 5%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 38 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 April 2020.
All research outputs
#7,478,082
of 22,860,626 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#320
of 736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,818
of 264,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#9
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,860,626 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 264,919 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 56% of its contemporaries.