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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Analyzing the association between fish consumption and osteoporosis in a sample of Chinese men
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s41043-017-0088-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xia Li, Tao Lei, Zihui Tang, Jingcheng Dong |
| Abstract |
The main purpose of this study was to estimate the associations between frequency of fish food consumption and osteoporosis (OP) in general Chinese men. We conducted a large-scale, community-based, cross-sectional study to investigate the associations by using self-report questionnaire to access frequency of fish food intake. A total of 1092 men were available for data analysis in this study. Multiple regression models controlling for confounding factors to include frequency of fish food consumption variable were performed to investigate the relationships for OP. Positive correlations between frequency of fish food consumption and T score were reported (β = 0.084, P value = 0.025). Multiple regression analysis indicated that the frequency of fish food consumption was significantly associated with OP (P < 0.05 for model 1 and model 2). The men with high frequency of fish food consumption had a lower prevalence of OP. The findings indicated that frequency of fish food consumption was independently and significantly associated with OP. The prevalence of OP was less frequent in Chinese men preferring fish food habits. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451397 retrospectively registered 28 May 2015. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 7% |
| Engineering | 2 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 38% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 April 2017.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition
#369
of 623 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,221
of 324,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 623 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 324,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.