↓ Skip to main content

Low carbohydrate diets improve atherogenic dyslipidemia even in the absence of weight loss

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition & Metabolism, June 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
61 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Low carbohydrate diets improve atherogenic dyslipidemia even in the absence of weight loss
Published in
Nutrition & Metabolism, June 2006
DOI 10.1186/1743-7075-3-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard D Feinman, Jeff S Volek

Abstract

Because of its effect on insulin, carbohydrate restriction is one of the obvious dietary choices for weight reduction and diabetes. Such interventions generally lead to higher levels of dietary fat than official recommendations and have long been criticized because of potential effects on cardiovascular risk although many literature reports have shown that they are actually protective even in the absence of weight loss. A recent report of Krauss et al. (AJCN, 2006) separates the effects of weight loss and carbohydrate restriction. They clearly confirm that carbohydrate restriction leads to an improvement in atherogenic lipid states in the absence of weight loss or in the presence of higher saturated fat. In distinction, low fat diets seem to require weight loss for effective improvement in atherogenic dyslipidemia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 X users 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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
United Kingdom 2 3%
New Zealand 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 66 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Researcher 12 16%
Other 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Arts and Humanities 5 7%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 17 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,001,377
of 25,608,265 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition & Metabolism
#151
of 1,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,527
of 88,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition & Metabolism
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,608,265 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,020 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 88,548 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 98% of its contemporaries.
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 5 of them.