↓ Skip to main content

Prospective double-blind randomized study on the efficacy and safety of an n-3 fatty acid enriched intravenous fat emulsion in postsurgical gastric and colorectal cancer patients

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
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
Prospective double-blind randomized study on the efficacy and safety of an n-3 fatty acid enriched intravenous fat emulsion in postsurgical gastric and colorectal cancer patients
Published in
Nutrition Journal, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/1475-2891-14-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cheng-Jen Ma, Jin-Ming Wu, Hsiang-Lin Tsai, Ching-Wen Huang, Chien-Yu Lu, Li-Chu Sun, Ying-Ling Shih, Chao-Wen Chen, Jui-Fen Chuang, Ming-Hsun Wu, Ming-Yang Wang, Ming-Tsan Lin, Jaw-Yuan Wang

Abstract

A lipid emulsion composed of soybean oil (long-chain triglycerides, LCT), medium-chain triglycerides (MCT) and n-3 poly-unsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) was evaluated for immune-modulation efficacy, safety, and tolerance in patients undergoing major surgery for gastric and colorectal cancer.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 91 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 15%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Master 8 9%
Other 6 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Other 23 25%
Unknown 27 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 33 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,989,215
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#895
of 1,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96,500
of 352,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#26
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,433 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 352,199 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.