| Title |
Preliminary results of a randomized controlled trial carried out with a fixed combination of S-adenosyl-L-methionine and betaine versus amitriptyline in patients with mild depression
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of General Medicine, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijgm.s79518 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Francesco Di Pierro, Roberto Settembre |
| Abstract |
S-adenosyl-L-methionine (SAMe), a safe, endogenous, pleiotropic methyl donor well known for its antidepressant role, has been assumed to have a possible role in increasing plasma levels of compounds known to be able to raise cardiovascular risk. Although the issue is still being debated, betaine (trimethylglycine), a specific methyl donor involved in the homocysteine circuit, may be able to reduce such a risk and/or, by determining a sparing effect on endogenous SAMe, may be able to improve the clinical efficiency of SAMe itself. Indeed, preliminary results have shown clinical improvement determined by an add-on therapy with betaine administered along with SAMe, versus SAMe alone, to patients affected by mild/moderate depression. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 26% |
| Psychology | 4 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
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 07 November 2023.
All research outputs
#20,154,364
of 24,775,802 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#1,043
of 1,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,086
of 363,186 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,775,802 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 363,186 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.