↓ Skip to main content

Differential effects of selective frankincense (Ru Xiang) essential oil versus non-selective sandalwood (Tan Xiang) essential oil on cultured bladder cancer cells: a microarray and bioinformatics…

Overview of attention for article published in Chinese Medicine, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#8 of 667)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
22 X users
facebook
193 Facebook pages
googleplus
3 Google+ users

Readers on

mendeley
63 Mendeley
citeulike
1 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
Differential effects of selective frankincense (Ru Xiang) essential oil versus non-selective sandalwood (Tan Xiang) essential oil on cultured bladder cancer cells: a microarray and bioinformatics study
Published in
Chinese Medicine, July 2014
DOI 10.1186/1749-8546-9-18
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mikhail G Dozmorov, Qing Yang, Weijuan Wu, Jonathan Wren, Mahmoud M Suhail, Cole L Woolley, D Gary Young, Kar-Ming Fung, Hsueh-Kung Lin

Abstract

Frankincense (Boswellia carterii, known as Ru Xiang in Chinese) and sandalwood (Santalum album, known as Tan Xiang in Chinese) are cancer preventive and therapeutic agents in Chinese medicine. Their biologically active ingredients are usually extracted from frankincense by hydrodistillation and sandalwood by distillation. This study aims to investigate the anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic activities of frankincense and sandalwood essential oils in cultured human bladder cancer cells.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users 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 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Student > Bachelor 11 17%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 18 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Chemistry 3 5%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 21 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 100. 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 20 February 2024.
All research outputs
#425,911
of 25,540,105 outputs
Outputs from Chinese Medicine
#8
of 667 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,629
of 242,423 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chinese Medicine
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,540,105 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 667 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 242,423 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 5 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