↓ Skip to main content

The low-level laser on acute myositis in rats.

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Cirurgica Brasileira, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
The low-level laser on acute myositis in rats.
Published in
Acta Cirurgica Brasileira, December 2015
DOI 10.1590/s0102-865020150120000003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carvalho, Ana Flávia Machado de, Sousa, Paula Fernanda Batista de, Feitosa, Maura Cristina Porto, Coelho, Nayana Pinheiro Machado de Freitas, Barros, Esmeralda Maria Lustosa, Feitosa, Valrian Campos, Arisawa, Emília Angela Loschiavo

Abstract

To analyze the effects of the low-level laser therapy in the acute myositis induced in rats. Twelve rats were subjected to bilateral ovariectomy for inducing osteoporosis. After surgery, they were divided into two groups: Ovariectomy-control group (G1, n=6), receiving 0.5 ml distilled water by gavage for 30 days, and Ovariectomy plus mastruz group (G2, n=6), receiving 0.5 ml of the hydroalcoholic extract of mastruz at 10% concentration (50mg) daily, for the same period. Then, the blood of the animals was collected for further biochemical analysis (liver function) and tibia and liver were removed for histological and histomorphometric analyses. In the MT group there was a statistic significant decrease in the number of inflammatory cells, related to the MI group (p<0.05), increase in the fibroblastic proliferation, when compared to groups C and MI related to MT group (p<0.01) and statistic significant edema regression (p=0.0400) in the MT group CONCLUSION: The low-level laser therapy was efficient in the reduction of the inflammatory process, increase of the fibroblastic proliferation and the reduction of the edema.

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.

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 4 18%
Lecturer 4 18%
Researcher 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 5 23%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 23%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Engineering 2 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 14%

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 02 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,796,953
of 7,847,043 outputs
Outputs from Acta Cirurgica Brasileira
#46
of 91 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#263,113
of 313,839 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Cirurgica Brasileira
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 7,847,043 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 91 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.0. 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 313,839 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 12 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.