↓ Skip to main content

A Chinese herb Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: mechanism, efficacy, and safety

Overview of attention for article published in Rheumatology International, March 2011
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 (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
140 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
A Chinese herb Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: mechanism, efficacy, and safety
Published in
Rheumatology International, March 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00296-011-1841-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jun Bao, Sheng-Ming Dai

Abstract

Tripterygium wilfordii Hook F (TwHF) is a Chinese herb with immunosuppressive effects and an established history of use in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Numerous preclinical studies have demonstrated that the extracts from the root of TwHF inhibit the expression of proinflammatory cytokines, proinflammatory mediators, adhesion molecules, and matrix metalloproteinases by macrophages, lymphocytes, synovial fibroblasts, and chondrocytes. TwHF also induces apoptosis in lymphocytes and synovial fibroblasts and inhibits their proliferation. Except numerous uncontrolled clinical trials, there are some prospective, double-blind, randomized, and placebo/sulfasalazine-controlled trials, also demonstrating greater improvement in RA disease activity by TwHF extract than placebo/sulfasalazine. Radiographic progression in RA may also be retarded by TwHF. Therefore, the immunosuppressive, cartilage protective, and anti-inflammatory effects of TwHF extracts are well demonstrated, and TwHF extract is an alternative disease modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) for the patients with RA refractory to conventional therapy.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Researcher 3 5%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 26 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 27 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 07 June 2023.
All research outputs
#2,936,169
of 22,780,967 outputs
Outputs from Rheumatology International
#233
of 2,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,248
of 108,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Rheumatology International
#5
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,780,967 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,178 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 108,657 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.