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 |
Cannabis in Chinese Medicine: Are Some Traditional Indications Referenced in Ancient Literature Related to Cannabinoids?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2017.00108 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E. Joseph Brand, Zhongzhen Zhao |
| Abstract |
Cannabis sativa L. (Cannabaceae) has a long history of utilization as a fiber and seed crop in China, and its achenes ("seeds") as well as other plant parts have been recorded in Chinese medical texts for nearly 2000 years. While the primary applications of cannabis in Chinese medicine center around the use of the achenes, ancient indications for the female inflorescence, and other plant parts include conditions such as pain and mental illness that are the subject of current research into cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD) and Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). However, little previous research has been conducted to analyze the Chinese medical literature in light of recent advances in the pharmacology and taxonomy of cannabis, and most of the relevant Chinese historical records have not yet been translated into Western languages to facilitate textual research. Furthermore, many key questions remain unresolved in the Chinese literature, including how various traditional drug names precisely correspond to different plant parts, as well as the implications of long-term selection for fiber-rich cultivars on the medical applications of cannabis in Chinese medicine. In this article, prominent historical applications of cannabis in Chinese medicine are chronologically reviewed, and indications found in ancient Chinese literature that may relate to cannabinoids such as CBD and Δ(9)-THC are investigated. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 84 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 | 18 | 21% |
| Portugal | 3 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| South Africa | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Guinea-Bissau | 1 | 1% |
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 51 | 61% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 73 | 87% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 6% |
| Scientists | 3 | 4% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 203 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 202 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 29 | 14% |
| Researcher | 23 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 26 | 13% |
| Unknown | 74 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 18 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 17 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 15 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 7% |
| Other | 37 | 18% |
| Unknown | 78 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 132. 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 27 February 2024.
All research outputs
#320,018
of 25,726,194 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#120
of 19,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,672
of 322,061 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#3
of 198 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,726,194 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,995 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 322,061 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 198 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.