↓ Skip to main content

Endocannabinoids

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 9: Endocannabinoids
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
13 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 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 9
Book title
Endocannabinoids
Published in
Handbook of experimental pharmacology, January 2015
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-20825-1_9
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-920824-4, 978-3-31-920825-1
Authors

Rubino, TIziana, Zamberletti, Erica, Parolaro, Daniela, TIziana Rubino, Erica Zamberletti, Daniela Parolaro

Editors

Roger G. Pertwee

Abstract

Preclinical and clinical data fully support the involvement of the endocannabinoid system in the etiopathogenesis of several mental diseases. In this review we will briefly summarize the most common alterations in the endocannabinoid system, in terms of cannabinoid receptors and endocannabinoid levels, present in mood disorders (anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, bipolar disorder, and suicidality) as well as psychosis (schizophrenia) and autism. The arising picture for each pathology is not always straightforward; however, both animal and human studies seem to suggest that pharmacological modulation of this system might represent a novel approach for treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 149 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 17%
Student > Master 20 13%
Researcher 15 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 44 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 19%
Neuroscience 16 11%
Psychology 10 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 6%
Other 20 13%
Unknown 57 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 2020.
All research outputs
#1,828,370
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#62
of 688 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,118
of 361,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Handbook of experimental pharmacology
#10
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 688 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 361,070 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.