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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Medicinal animals used in ethnoveterinary practices of the 'Cariri Paraibano', NE Brazil
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4269-7-30 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wedson MS Souto, José S Mourão, Raynner RD Barboza, Lívia ET Mendonça, Reinaldo FP Lucena, Maine VA Confessor, Washington LS Vieira, Paulo FGP Montenegro, Luiz CS Lopez, Rômulo RN Alves |
| Abstract |
Zootherapy is important in various socio-cultural environments, and innumerous examples of the use of animal derived remedies can currently be found in many urban, semi-urban and more remote localities in all parts of the world, particularly in developing countries. However, although a number of ethnobiological inventories concerning the use of medicinal animals in human health care have been compiled in Brazil in recent years, zootherapeutic practices in ethnoveterinary medicine (EVM) are poorly described and neglected in favor of human ethnomedicine. In this sense, the purpose of this study was to describe the local zootherapeutic practices in ethnoveterinary medicine of semi-arid of NE Brazil (Caatinga biome) and to contribute to future research about the validation of the effects and side effects of these animal products |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| Pakistan | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 125 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 16% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 31 | 23% |
| Unknown | 31 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 53 | 40% |
| Environmental Science | 13 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 37 | 28% |
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 23 October 2011.
All research outputs
#3,240,332
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#109
of 731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,951
of 136,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 136,065 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 53% of its contemporaries.