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 |
Plasma N‐acylethanolamine and endocannabinoid levels in burning mouth syndrome: Potential role in disease pathogenesis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1111/jop.12692 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alison Barry, Ken D. O'Halloran, Joseph P. McKenna, Christine McCreary, Brendan Harhen, Daniel M. Kerr, David P. Finn, Eric J. Downer |
| Abstract |
The objective was to measure endocannabinoid (eCB) ligands and non-cannabinoid N-acylethanolamine (NAE) molecules in plasma from individuals with burning mouth syndrome (BMS), and to determine if plasma eCB/NAE levels correlated with pain, inflammation and depressive symptomatology in this cohort. Plasma content of the eCBs, anandamide (AEA) and 2-arachidonoyl-glycerol (2-AG), and the NAE molecules, palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) and oleolylethanolamide (OEA), were assessed in healthy subjects (n=8) and in a cohort of newly diagnosed BMS patients (n=9) using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Plasma eCBs and NAE profiles were correlated with self-rated oral cavity pain intensities, depressive symptomatology and plasma IL-8 levels. Plasma levels of PEA, but not OEA, AEA or 2-AG, were significantly elevated in patients with BMS, when compared to plasma from healthy individuals. Plasma PEA, OEA and AEA levels correlated with depressive symptomatology. This is the first evidence to indicate that circulating eCB/NAE levels are altered in BMS. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 23% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 10% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 50% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,441,046
of 24,477,448 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine
#472
of 925 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,483
of 335,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Oral Pathology & Medicine
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,477,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 925 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 335,978 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.