↓ Skip to main content

Pros and cons of CLA consumption: an insight from clinical evidences

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition & Metabolism, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
11 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users
video
8 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
209 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
Pros and cons of CLA consumption: an insight from clinical evidences
Published in
Nutrition & Metabolism, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/1743-7075-12-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sailas Benjamin, Priji Prakasan, Sajith Sreedharan, Andre-Denis G Wright, Friedrich Spener

Abstract

This comprehensive review critically evaluates whether supposed health benefits propounded upon human consumption of conjugated linoleic acids (CLAs) are clinically proven or not. With a general introduction on the chemistry of CLA, major clinical evidences pertaining to intervention strategies, body composition, cardio-vascular health, immunity, asthma, cancer and diabetes are evaluated. Supposed adverse effects such as oxidative stress, insulin resistance, irritation of intestinal tract and milk fat depression are also examined. It seems that no consistent result was observed even in similar studies conducted at different laboratories, this may be due to variations in age, gender, racial and geographical disparities, coupled with type and dose of CLA supplemented. Thus, supposed promising results reported in mechanistic and pre-clinical studies cannot be extrapolated with humans, mainly due to the lack of inconsistency in analyses, prolonged intervention studies, follow-up studies and international co-ordination of concerted studies. Briefly, clinical evidences accumulated thus far show that CLA is not eliciting significantly promising and consistent health effects so as to uphold it as neither a functional nor a medical food.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 209 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 206 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 16%
Researcher 29 14%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 7%
Other 35 17%
Unknown 46 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 38 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 4%
Other 39 19%
Unknown 60 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 102. 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 29 September 2023.
All research outputs
#413,890
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition & Metabolism
#67
of 1,014 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,055
of 360,630 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition & Metabolism
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,014 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 360,630 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.