↓ 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 (#32 of 1,346)
  • 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
24 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
82 tweeters
patent
1 patent
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
9 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
16 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
174 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
696 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.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 82 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 696 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 685 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 189 27%
Student > Master 125 18%
Researcher 53 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 7%
Student > Postgraduate 42 6%
Other 108 16%
Unknown 127 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 172 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 125 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 62 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 59 8%
Sports and Recreations 39 6%
Other 93 13%
Unknown 146 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 291. 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 30 September 2021.
All research outputs
#72,651
of 19,190,141 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#32
of 1,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#672
of 205,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#7
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,190,141 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 1,346 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.1. 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 205,005 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 154 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.