↓ Skip to main content

Comparative absorption of curcumin formulations

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
29 tweeters
patent
5 patents
facebook
16 Facebook pages
video
2 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
129 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
398 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
Comparative absorption of curcumin formulations
Published in
Nutrition Journal, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1475-2891-13-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ralf Jäger, Ryan P Lowery, Allison V Calvanese, Jordan M Joy, Martin Purpura, Jacob M Wilson

Abstract

The potential health benefits of curcumin are limited by its poor solubility, low absorption from the gut, rapid metabolism and rapid systemic elimination. The purpose of this study was the comparative measurement of the increases in levels of curcuminoids (curcumin, demethoxycurcumin, bisdemethoxycurcumin) and the metabolite tetrahydrocurcumin after oral administration of three different curcumin formulations in comparison to unformulated standard.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 398 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 <1%
India 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 390 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 76 19%
Student > Master 63 16%
Researcher 56 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 12%
Other 32 8%
Other 65 16%
Unknown 57 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 75 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 73 18%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 48 12%
Chemistry 37 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 9%
Other 60 15%
Unknown 70 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 75. 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 29 September 2019.
All research outputs
#325,383
of 16,994,048 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#109
of 1,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,518
of 261,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,994,048 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,273 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 261,685 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them