↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Effectiveness of NEM® brand eggshell membrane in the treatment of suboptimal joint function in dogs: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Overview of attention for article published in Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 135)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
59 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
facebook
3 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
Title
Effectiveness of NEM® brand eggshell membrane in the treatment of suboptimal joint function in dogs: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study
Published in
Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports, August 2016
DOI 10.2147/vmrr.s101842
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin J Ruff, Kenneth J Kopp, Pamela Von Behrens, Mark Lux, Matthew Mahn, Matthew Back

Abstract

Sub-optimal joint function is extremely prevalent in dogs. Therefore, a 6-week, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted at eight different veterinary clinics to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of NEM® brand eggshell membrane (EM), a novel dietary supplement shown in other species to help maintain healthy joints and connective tissues. Fifty-one dogs received oral EM ~13.5 mg/kg (6 mg/lb) or placebo (excipients) once daily for 6 weeks. The primary outcome measure of this study was to evaluate the change in mean joint function following 1 week and 6 weeks of supplementation as determined via the Canine Brief Pain Inventory (CBPI) questionnaire (Q#5-10) in the treatment group versus the placebo group. Secondary outcome measures were for changes in mean CBPI pain and CBPI quality of life, and mean joint pain, mobility and lameness via Veterinary Canine Scoring Assessments (VCSA). A final secondary outcome measure was for a change in serum levels of the cartilage degradation biomarker, c-terminal cross-linked telopeptide of type-II collagen (CTX-II). Supplementation with EM produced a significant treatment response versus placebo at 1 week (20.5% improvement, P=0.028), but fell shy of significance at 6 weeks post-treatment (22.5% improvement) for the primary outcome measure (CBPI Function), despite a sizeable treatment effect. Similarly, there was also a significant treatment response versus placebo at 1 week for CBPI Pain (19.4% improvement, P=0.010), but fell just shy of significance at 6 weeks (22.5% improvement), again despite a sizeable treatment effect. Results were not significant versus placebo at 1 week for CBPI quality of life (14.0% improvement), but produced a significant treatment response by the end of the 6-week study (26.8% improvement, P=0.033). Additionally, EM produced a significant treatment response versus placebo at 6 weeks for VCSA pain (23.6% improvement, P=0.012), but fell shy of significance for VCSA mobility and VCSA lameness (walking & trotting). Serum CTX-II levels in EM-supplemented dogs was significantly improved versus placebo at 6 weeks (47.9% improvement, P=0.018). There were no serious adverse events reported during the study and subject dog owners reported that EM was well tolerated by their pets. Supplementation with EM, ~13.5 mg/kg (6 mg/lb) taken once daily, significantly reduced joint pain and improved joint function rapidly (CBPI 1 week) and demonstrated a lasting improvement in joint pain (VCSA 6 weeks) leading to an improved quality of life (CBPI 6 weeks). Moreover, a profound chondroprotective effect was demonstrated following 6 weeks of supplementation with EM (CTX-II).

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Other 7 20%
Unknown 8 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 11 31%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 465. 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 26 January 2024.
All research outputs
#58,390
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports
#4
of 135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,250
of 381,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Veterinary Medicine : Research and Reports
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 135 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 381,036 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them