↓ Skip to main content

Endocannabinoids

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 2: Endocannabinoids
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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.
Chapter title
Endocannabinoids
Chapter number 2
Book title
Endocannabinoids
Published in
Handbook of experimental pharmacology, January 2015
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-20825-1_2
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-920824-4, 978-3-31-920825-1
Authors

Cascio, Maria Grazia, Marini, Pietro, Maria Grazia Cascio, Pietro Marini

Editors

Roger G. Pertwee

Abstract

Since the discovery of the two cannabinoid receptors, CB1 and CB2, several molecules, commonly defined as endocannabinoids, able to bind to and functionally activate these receptors, have been discovered and characterized. Although the general thought was that the endocannabinoids were mainly derivatives of the n-6 fatty acid arachidonic acid, recent data have shown that also derivatives (ethanolamides) of n-3 fatty acids may be classified as endocannabinoids. Whether the n-3 endocannabinoids follow the same biosynthetic and metabolic routes of the n-6 endocannabinoids is not yet clear and so warrants further investigation. In this review, we describe the primary biosynthetic and metabolic pathways for the two well-established endocannabinoids, anandamide and 2-arachidonoylglycerol.

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 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 16 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 18 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 22 February 2019.
All research outputs
#6,469,584
of 24,008,549 outputs
Outputs from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#188
of 664 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,153
of 360,042 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#28
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,008,549 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 664 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 360,042 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 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 59% of its contemporaries.