↓ Skip to main content

RETRACTED ARTICLE: DNA barcoding detects contamination and substitution in North American herbal products

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#25 of 4,271)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
88 news outlets
blogs
24 blogs
twitter
355 X users
patent
1 patent
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
109 Facebook pages
wikipedia
12 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
30 Google+ users
reddit
3 Redditors
video
9 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
454 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
564 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
RETRACTED ARTICLE: DNA barcoding detects contamination and substitution in North American herbal products
Published in
BMC Medicine, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1741-7015-11-222
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven G Newmaster, Meghan Grguric, Dhivya Shanmughanandhan, Sathishkumar Ramalingam, Subramanyam Ragupathy

Abstract

Herbal products available to consumers in the marketplace may be contaminated or substituted with alternative plant species and fillers that are not listed on the labels. According to the World Health Organization, the adulteration of herbal products is a threat to consumer safety. Our research aimed to investigate herbal product integrity and authenticity with the goal of protecting consumers from health risks associated with product substitution and contamination.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 355 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 564 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 13 2%
Canada 4 <1%
India 3 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Other 4 <1%
Unknown 533 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 99 18%
Student > Master 79 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 75 13%
Student > Bachelor 70 12%
Student > Postgraduate 31 5%
Other 121 21%
Unknown 89 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 188 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 76 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 62 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 37 7%
Chemistry 22 4%
Other 74 13%
Unknown 105 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1164. 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 09 July 2024.
All research outputs
#13,438
of 26,251,549 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#25
of 4,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50
of 224,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#1
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,251,549 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 46.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 224,000 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.