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 |
Use and valuation of native and introduced medicinal plant species in Campo Hermoso and Zetaquira, Boyacá, Colombia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4269-9-23 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ana Lucía Cadena-González, Marten Sørensen, Ida Theilade |
| Abstract |
Medicinal plant species contribute significantly to folk medicine in Colombia. However, few local studies have investigated whether species used are introduced or native and whether there is a difference in importance of native and introduced medicinal plant species. The aim of the present study was to describe the use of medicinal plants within two municipalities, Campo Hermoso and Zetaquira, both in the department of Boyacá, Colombia and to assess the importance of native and introduced plants to healers, amateur healers and local people. As local healers including amateur healers have no history of introduced species our working hypotheses (H(1-2)) were that H(1): native and introduced medicinal plant species are of equal importance and H(2): healers and amateur healers do not differentiate in their preferences between native and introduced medicinal plant species. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Honduras | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 121 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 28 | 22% |
| Unknown | 35 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 39 | 31% |
| Environmental Science | 15 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 17 | 13% |
| Unknown | 38 | 30% |
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 15 October 2014.
All research outputs
#20,196,821
of 22,715,151 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#658
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,117
of 199,488 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#18
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,715,151 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 199,488 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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.