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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Synergistic action of compounds isolated from the hexane extract ofArdisia crisparoot against tumour-promoting effect,in vitro
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Natural Product Research, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1080/14786419.2014.917415 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Looi Ting Yeong, Roslida Abdul Hamid, Latifah Saiful Yazan, Huzwah Khaza'ai, Dayang Erna Zulaikha Awang Hamsin |
| Abstract |
An isomeric mixture of α,β-amyrin (triterpene) and 2-methoxy-6-undecyl-1,4-benzoquinone (quinone) isolated from the Ardisia crispa root hexane (ACRH) extract was reported to possess anti-inflammatory properties in vivo. Considering the close association between inflammation and cancer, on top of the lack of antitumour study on those compounds, this study aimed to determine the potential of both compounds against tumour promotion in vitro, either as single agent or in combination. Triterpene and quinone compounds, as well as triterpene-quinone fraction (TQF) and ACRH were subjected to inhibition of Epstein-Barr virus-early antigen (EBV-EA) activation assay for that purpose. Compared with curcumin (positive control), inhibition against EBV-EA activation occurred in the order: ACRH>TQF ≥ curcumin>α,β-amyrin ≥ 2-methoxy-6-undecyl-1,4-benzoquinone. These findings reported, for the first time, the antitumor-promoting effect of α,β-amyrin and 2-methoxy-6-undecyl-1,4-benzoquinone from the roots of A. crispa, which was enhanced when both compounds act in synergy. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 36% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
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 22 January 2015.
All research outputs
#20,249,662
of 22,778,347 outputs
Outputs from Natural Product Research
#1,325
of 2,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,960
of 227,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Natural Product Research
#26
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,778,347 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 2,103 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. 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 227,108 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 40 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.