↓ Skip to main content

Caffeine analogs: biomedical impact

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, May 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
wikipedia
6 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
203 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
244 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
Caffeine analogs: biomedical impact
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, May 2007
DOI 10.1007/s00018-007-7051-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. W. Daly

Abstract

Caffeine, widely consumed in beverages, and many xanthine analogs have had a major impact on biomedical research. Caffeine and various analogs, the latter designed to enhance potency and selectivity toward specific biological targets, have played key roles in defining the nature and role of adenosine receptors, phosphodiesterases, and calcium release channels in physiological processes. Such xanthines and other caffeine-inspired heterocycles now provide important research tools and potential therapeutic agents for intervention in Alzheimer's disease, asthma, cancer, diabetes, and Parkinson's disease. Such compounds also have activity as analgesics, antiinflammatories, antitussives, behavioral stimulants, diuretics/natriuretics, and lipolytics. Adverse effects can include anxiety, hypertension, certain drug interactions, and withdrawal symptoms.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 237 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 18%
Student > Bachelor 42 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 15%
Researcher 19 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 6%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 63 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 11%
Chemistry 15 6%
Sports and Recreations 13 5%
Other 54 22%
Unknown 68 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 12 September 2023.
All research outputs
#3,219,193
of 24,307,517 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#535
of 5,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,551
of 73,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#5
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,307,517 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 73,509 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.