↓ Skip to main content

Alternate day fasting for weight loss in normal weight and overweight subjects: a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#40 of 1,524)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
30 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
59 X users
patent
1 patent
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
8 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
20 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
276 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
887 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Alternate day fasting for weight loss in normal weight and overweight subjects: a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Nutrition Journal, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/1475-2891-12-146
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krista A Varady, Surabhi Bhutani, Monica C Klempel, Cynthia M Kroeger, John F Trepanowski, Jacob M Haus, Kristin K Hoddy, Yolian Calvo

Abstract

Alternate day fasting (ADF; ad libitum "feed day", alternated with 25% energy intake "fast day"), is effective for weight loss and cardio-protection in obese individuals. Whether these effects occur in normal weight and overweight individuals remains unknown. This study examined the effect of ADF on body weight and coronary heart disease risk in non-obese subjects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 59 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 887 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Unknown 876 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 200 23%
Student > Master 134 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 62 7%
Researcher 60 7%
Student > Postgraduate 55 6%
Other 141 16%
Unknown 235 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 196 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 141 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 69 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 68 8%
Sports and Recreations 41 5%
Other 111 13%
Unknown 261 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 320. 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 13 March 2024.
All research outputs
#105,534
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#40
of 1,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#725
of 224,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#2
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 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 1,524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.5. 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 224,855 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 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.