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 |
Avaliação do papel do sistema canabidiol em um modelo de lesão renal por isquemia/reperfusão em animais
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.5935/0103-507x.20150064 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rodrigo Zon Soares, Francieli Vuolo, Dhébora Mozena Dall'Igna, Monique Michels, José Alexandre de Souza Crippa, Jaime Eduardo Cecílio Hallak, Antonio Waldo Zuardi, Felipe Dal-Pizzol |
| Abstract |
This work aimed to investigate the effects of the administration of cannabidiol in a kidney ischemia/reperfusion animal model. Kidney injury was induced by 45 minutes of renal ischemia followed by reperfusion. Cannabidiol (5mg/kg) was administered immediately after reperfusion. Ischemia/reperfusion increased the IL-1 and TNF levels, and these levels were attenuated by cannabidiol treatment. Additionally, cannabidiol was able to decrease lipid and protein oxidative damage, but not the nitrite/nitrate levels. Kidney injury after ischemia/reperfusion seemed to be independent of the cannabidiol receptor 1 and cannabidiol receptor 2 (CB1 and CB2) expression levels, as there was no significant increase in these receptors after reperfusion. The cannabidiol treatment had a protective effect against inflammation and oxidative damage in the kidney ischemia/reperfusion model. These effects seemed to be independent of CB1/CB2 receptor activation. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Japan | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
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 > Master | 6 | 27% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 18% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 9% |
| Psychology | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 23% |
| Unknown | 2 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 May 2021.
All research outputs
#8,262,107
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#96
of 350 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,034
of 359,538 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva
#5
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 350 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 359,538 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.