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 |
Melastoma malabathricum (L.) Smith Ethnomedicinal Uses, Chemical Constituents, and Pharmacological Properties: A Review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM), December 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1155/2012/258434 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
S. Mohd. Joffry, N. J. Yob, M. S. Rofiee, M. M. R. Meor Mohd. Affandi, Z. Suhaili, F. Othman, A. Md. Akim, M. N. M. Desa, Z. A. Zakaria |
| Abstract |
Melastoma malabathricum L. (Melastomataceae) is one of the 22 species found in the Southeast Asian region, including Malaysia. Considered as native to tropical and temperate Asia and the Pacific Islands, this commonly found small shrub has gained herbal status in the Malay folklore belief as well as the Indian, Chinese, and Indonesian folk medicines. Ethnopharmacologically, the leaves, shoots, barks, seeds, and roots of M. malabathricum have been used to treat diarrhoea, dysentery, hemorrhoids, cuts and wounds, toothache, and stomachache. Scientific findings also revealed the wide pharmacological actions of various parts of M. malabthricum, such as antinociceptive, anti-inflammatory, wound healing, antidiarrheal, cytotoxic, and antioxidant activities. Various types of phytochemical constituents have also been isolated and identifed from different parts of M. malabathricum. Thus, the aim of the present review is to present comprehensive information on ethnomedicinal uses, phytochemical constituents, and pharmacological activities of M. malabathricum. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 462 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brunei Darussalam | 2 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 459 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 111 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 49 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 32 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 6% |
| Researcher | 16 | 3% |
| Other | 46 | 10% |
| Unknown | 180 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 65 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 37 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 32 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 29 | 6% |
| Other | 78 | 17% |
| Unknown | 191 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 January 2020.
All research outputs
#7,786,691
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#2,013
of 9,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,450
of 249,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evidence-based Complementary & Alternative Medicine (eCAM)
#20
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,352 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 249,680 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 62 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 67% of its contemporaries.