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 |
The effect of wheat prebiotics on the gut bacterial population and iron status of iron deficient broiler chickens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2891-13-58 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elad Tako, Raymond P Glahn, Marija Knez, James CR Stangoulis |
| Abstract |
Currently, there is a lot of interest in improving gut health, and consequently increasing Fe absorption, by managing the colonic microbial population. This is traditionally done by the consumption of probiotics, live microbial food supplements. However, an alternative, and often very effective approach, is the consumption of food ingredients known as prebiotics. Fructans and arabinoxylans are naturally occurring non-digestible oligosaccharides in wheat that exhibit prebiotic properties and may enhance intestinal iron (Fe) absorption. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of prebiotics from wheat on Fe bioavailability in vitro (Caco-2 cells) and in vivo (broiler chickens, Gallus gallus). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 13% |
| United States | 1 | 13% |
| Brazil | 1 | 13% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 4 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 38% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 13% |
| Researcher | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 30 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 38 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 23 January 2023.
All research outputs
#4,357,371
of 23,578,918 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#734
of 1,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,229
of 229,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#25
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,578,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,447 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.3. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 229,911 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.