↓ Skip to main content

Luminally Acting Agents for Constipation Treatment: A Review Based on Literatures and Patents

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Luminally Acting Agents for Constipation Treatment: A Review Based on Literatures and Patents
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2017.00418
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hong Yang, Tonghui Ma

Abstract

Constipation is one of the most frequently reported gastrointestinal (GI) disorders that negatively impacts quality of life and is associated with a significant economic burden to the patients and society. Traditional treatments including lifestyle modification and laxatives are often ineffective in the more severe forms of constipation and over the long term. New medications targeting at intestinal chloride channels and colonic serotonin receptors have been demonstrated effective in recent years. Emerging agents focusing on improving intestinal secretion and/or colonic motility have been shown effective in animal models and even in clinical trials. Recognization of the role of cystic fibrosis transmembrane regulator (CFTR) and calcium-activated chloride channels (CaCCs) in intestine fluid secretion and motility modulation makes CFTR and CaCCs promising molecule targets for anti-constipation therapy. Although there are multiple choices for constipation treatment, there is still a recognized need for new medications in anti-constipation therapy. The present review covers the discovery of luminally acting agents for constipation treatment described in both patents (2011-present) and scientific literatures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Other 3 12%
Researcher 3 12%
Student > Master 3 12%
Unspecified 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 6 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 12%
Unspecified 2 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 03 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,431,953
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#10,172
of 16,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,256
of 314,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#167
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 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 16,266 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. 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 314,551 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 252 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.