↓ Skip to main content

Monosodium glutamate-induced oxidative kidney damage and possible mechanisms: a mini-review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Biomedical Science, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Monosodium glutamate-induced oxidative kidney damage and possible mechanisms: a mini-review
Published in
Journal of Biomedical Science, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12929-015-0192-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amod Sharma

Abstract

Animal studies suggest that chronic monosodium glutamate (MSG) intake induces kidney damage by oxidative stress. However, the underlying mechanisms are still unclear, despite the growing evidence and consensus that α-ketoglutarate dehydrogenase, glutamate receptors and cystine-glutamate antiporter play an important role in up-regulation of oxidative stress in MSG-induced renal toxicity. This review summaries evidence from studies into MSG-induced renal oxidative damage, possible mechanisms and their importance from a toxicological viewpoint.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 30%
Student > Master 13 13%
Researcher 5 5%
Lecturer 5 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 5%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 33 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 3%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 34 34%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 18 January 2022.
All research outputs
#2,241,568
of 20,126,709 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Biomedical Science
#63
of 883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,790
of 276,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Biomedical Science
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,126,709 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 883 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 276,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them