↓ Skip to main content

A review of drug-induced liver injury databases

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Toxicology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
A review of drug-induced liver injury databases
Published in
Archives of Toxicology, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00204-017-2024-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guangwen Luo, Yiting Shen, Lizhu Yang, Aiping Lu, Zheng Xiang

Abstract

Drug-induced liver injuries have been a major focus of current research in drug development, and are also one of the major reasons for the failure and withdrawal of drugs in development. Drug-induced liver injuries have been systematically recorded in many public databases, which have become valuable resources in this field. In this study, we provide an overview of these databases, including the liver injury-specific databases LiverTox, LTKB, Open TG-GATEs, LTMap and Hepatox, and the general databases, T3DB, DrugBank, DITOP, DART, CTD and HSDB. The features and limitations of these databases are summarized and discussed in detail. Apart from their powerful functions, we believe that these databases can be improved in several ways: by providing the data about the molecular targets involved in liver toxicity, by incorporating information regarding liver injuries caused by drug interactions, and by regularly updating the data.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 20%
Student > Postgraduate 4 16%
Unspecified 3 12%
Lecturer 2 8%
Other 6 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 20%
Unspecified 5 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 20%
Environmental Science 2 8%
Other 2 8%

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 31 July 2017.
All research outputs
#3,210,744
of 11,541,953 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Toxicology
#442
of 1,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,701
of 263,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Toxicology
#5
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,541,953 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,694 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 263,309 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 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 72% of its contemporaries.