↓ Skip to main content

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Flavocoxid, a dual inhibitor of COX-2 and 5-LOX of natural origin, attenuates the inflammatory response and protects mice from sepsis

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, February 2012
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 (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Flavocoxid, a dual inhibitor of COX-2 and 5-LOX of natural origin, attenuates the inflammatory response and protects mice from sepsis
Published in
Critical Care, February 2012
DOI 10.1186/1364-8535-16-r32
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandra Bitto, Letteria Minutoli, Antonio David, Natasha Irrera, Mariagrazia Rinaldi, Francesco S Venuti, Francesco Squadrito, Domenica Altavilla

Abstract

Cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) is an inflammatory condition that leads to multisystemic organ failure. Flavocoxid, a dual inhibitor of cyclooxygenase (COX-2) and 5-lipoxygenase (5-LOX), has been shown in vitro to possess antiinflammatory activity in lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-stimulated rat macrophages by reducing nuclear factor (NF)-κB activity and COX-2, 5-LOX and inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) expression. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of flavocoxid in a murine model of CLP-induced polymicrobial sepsis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
India 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Romania 1 1%
Unknown 62 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 10 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 11 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 August 2022.
All research outputs
#4,574,781
of 25,483,400 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#3,153
of 6,569 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,444
of 169,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#21
of 130 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,483,400 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,569 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 169,371 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 130 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.