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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Does consumption of an aqueous extract of Hibscus sabdariffa affect renal function in subjects with mild to moderate hypertension?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Journal of Physiological Sciences, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12576-016-0458-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel Chukwu Nwachukwu, Eddy Ikemefuna Aneke, Nkiru Zuada Nwachukwu, Nkiru Azubike, Lenard Fidelis Obika |
| Abstract |
Hibiscus sabdariffa (HS) has been traditionally used as a herbal medicine in Nigeria mainly because of its antihypertensive action. In view of the recent increase in the prevalence of renal failure, we have investigated the effect of HS consumption on renal function in Nigerians with mild to moderate hypertension. A total of 78 newly diagnosed but untreated subjects with mild to moderate hypertension attending the medical outpatients unit of Enugu State University Teaching Hospital (Enugu, Nigeria) were recruited for the study. These subjects were randomly divided into three equally sized groups that received HS or lisinopril (treatment groups) or placebo (control group), once daily for 4 weeks. Indices of renal function (urine volume and creatinine clearance) were measured at baseline and weekly throughout the study period. HS and lisinopril significantly increased (P < 0.001) urine volume compared to placebo, and HS significantly (P < 0.001) increased urine volume more than lisinopril. HS significantly increased (P < 0.001) creatinine clearance compared to placebo whereas lisinopril did not. These results indicate that HS consumption improved indices of renal function in our study population of Nigerians with mild to moderate hypertension. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 40% |
| Canada | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 10% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 79 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 30 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 19% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 33 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 16 October 2020.
All research outputs
#5,788,383
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#46
of 321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,526
of 338,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 338,854 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.