↓ Skip to main content

Protective and restorative potency of Vitamin D on persistent biochemical autistic features induced in propionic acid-intoxicated rat pups

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 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
Protective and restorative potency of Vitamin D on persistent biochemical autistic features induced in propionic acid-intoxicated rat pups
Published in
BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6882-14-416
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hanan A Alfawaz, Ramesa Shafi Bhat, Laila Al-Ayadhi, Afaf K El-Ansary

Abstract

Reducing exposure to toxic environmental agents is a critical area of intervention. Prenatal or postnatal exposure to certain chemicals has been documented to increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder. Propionic acid (PA) found in some foods and formed as a metabolic product of gut microbiota has been reported to mediate the effects of autism.Results from animal studies may help to identify environmental contaminants and drugs that produce or prevent neurotoxicity, and may thereby aid in the treatment of neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism. The present study investigated the protective and/or therapeutic effects of vitamin D against brain intoxication induced by propionic acid (PPA) in rats.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 115 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 15%
Student > Master 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 9%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 32 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Neuroscience 6 5%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 36 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 June 2019.
All research outputs
#17,489,487
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#2,201
of 3,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,262
of 274,129 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary Medicine and Therapies
#68
of 115 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,982 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 274,129 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 115 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.