↓ Skip to main content

Herbal Medicines for the Treatment of Functional and Inflammatory Bowel Disorders

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, March 2014
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Herbal Medicines for the Treatment of Functional and Inflammatory Bowel Disorders
Published in
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology, March 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2014.03.014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gerald Holtmann, Nicholas J. Talley

Abstract

In many parts of the world, there continues to be a long-standing tradition of prescribing herbal products for a range of gastrointestinal conditions. Scientific evidence supporting the use of all herbal preparations is imperfect, however, and available studies are plagued by methodological limitations. For functional gastrointestinal disorders, there is limited evidence supporting the use of some well-characterized preparations. A number of herbals have immunomodulatory activity, and in inflammatory bowel disease there are limited positive placebo-controlled trials; other studies used active controls with suboptimal doses of the comparators. Like all drugs, herbals can lead to serious adverse events (eg, hepatic failure). Quality control is a serious issue to consider when prescribing herbal medicines. Many herbal preparations are marketed without evidence for stringent adherence to good manufacturing practice guidelines. Unpredictable environmental conditions may affect the composition and the concentration of the active ingredients of plant extracts. Further, commercial herbal products usually combine a variable plethora of chemical families with possible medicinal utility. While some of these ingredients might be of benefit, the concentration and dose of these constituents needs to be closely monitored. Physicians and regulators need to remain very cautious about the use of herbal remedies. Appropriate scientific evidence for the claimed clinical benefits should become mandatory worldwide, and the standards for production and safety monitoring should comply with established standards for chemically defined products. If these principles were adopted, the full value of herbal remedies may come to light, particularly as the individually bioactive compounds present in these preparations become recognized.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 96 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 28 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 34 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 11 March 2015.
All research outputs
#1,829,370
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
#770
of 4,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,988
of 237,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
#6
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,672 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 237,678 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.