↓ Skip to main content
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 (88th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
patent
3 patents

Readers on

mendeley
91 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.
Article details
Title
Repositioning Antitubercular 6‑Nitro-2,3-dihydroimidazo[2,1‑b][1,3]oxazoles for Neglected Tropical Diseases: Structure–Activity Studies on a Preclinical Candidate for Visceral Leishmaniasis
Published in
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, March 2016
DOI 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.5b01699
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

6-Nitro-2,3-dihydroimidazo[2,1-b][1,3]oxazole derivatives were initially studied for tuberculosis within a backup program for the clinical trial agent pretomanid (PA-824). Phenotypic screening of representative examples against kinetoplastid diseases unexpectedly led to the identification of DNDI-VL-2098 as a potential first-in-class drug candidate for visceral leishmaniasis (VL). Additional work was then conducted to delineate its essential structural features, aiming to improve solubility and safety without compromising activity against VL. While the 4-nitroimidazole portion was specifically required, several modifications to the aryloxy side chain were well tolerated e.g., exchange of the linking oxygen for nitrogen (or piperazine), biaryl extension, and replacement of phenyl rings by pyridine. Several less lipophilic analogues displayed improved aqueous solubility, particularly at low pH, although stability towards liver microsomes was highly variable. Upon evaluation in a mouse model of acute Leishmania donovani infection, one phenylpyridine derivative (37) stood out, providing efficacy surpassing that of the original preclinical lead.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Panama 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 89 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 27 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 28 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 29 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 18 March 2025.
All research outputs
#3,185,141
of 33,503,639 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
#3,177
of 27,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,745
of 334,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
#43
of 199 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,503,639 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27,405 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. 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 334,347 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 199 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.