↓ Skip to main content

In vitro screening and evaluation of antivenom phytochemicals from Azima tetracantha Lam. leaves against Bungarus caeruleus and Vipera russelli

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
In vitro screening and evaluation of antivenom phytochemicals from Azima tetracantha Lam. leaves against Bungarus caeruleus and Vipera russelli
Published in
Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases, April 2014
DOI 10.1186/1678-9199-20-12
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bhavya Janardhan, Vineetha M Shrikanth, Kiran K Mirajkar, Sunil S More

Abstract

Snakebites are considered a neglected tropical disease that affects thousands of people worldwide. Although antivenom is the only treatment available, it is associated with several side effects. As an alternative, plants have been extensively studied in order to obtain an alternative treatment. In folk medicine, Azima tetracantha Lam. is usually used to treat snakebites. The present study aims to provide a scientific explanation for the use of this plant against snakebite. The extracts of shade dried leaves of A. tetracantha were tested for in vitro inhibitory activity on toxic venom enzymes like phosphomonoesterase, phosphodiesterase, acetylcholinesterase, hyaluronidase etc. from Bungarus caeruleus and Vipera russelli venoms.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Algeria 1 2%
Unknown 57 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 4 7%
Unspecified 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 12%
Chemistry 5 9%
Unspecified 3 5%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 16 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 April 2014.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases
#455
of 539 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,012
of 239,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Venomous Animals and Toxins including Tropical Diseases
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 539 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 239,202 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.