↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of a low carbohydrate and low fat diet for weight maintenance in overweight or obese adults enrolled in a clinical weight management program

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, November 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
Comparison of a low carbohydrate and low fat diet for weight maintenance in overweight or obese adults enrolled in a clinical weight management program
Published in
Nutrition Journal, November 2007
DOI 10.1186/1475-2891-6-36
Pubmed ID
Authors

James D LeCheminant, Cheryl A Gibson, Debra K Sullivan, Sandra Hall, Rik Washburn, Mary C Vernon, Chelsea Curry, Elizabeth Stewart, Eric C Westman, Joseph E Donnelly

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that a low carbohydrate (LC) diet may be equally or more effective for short-term weight loss than a traditional low fat (LF) diet; however, less is known about how they compare for weight maintenance. The purpose of this study was to compare body weight (BW) for participants in a clinical weight management program, consuming a LC or LF weight maintenance diet for 6 months following weight loss. Fifty-five (29 low carbohydrate diet; 26 low fat diet) overweight/obese middle-aged adults completed a 9 month weight management program that included instruction for behavior, physical activity (PA), and nutrition. For 3 months all participants consumed an identical liquid diet (2177 kJ/day) followed by 1 month of re-feeding with solid foods either low in carbohydrate or low in fat. For the remaining 5 months, participants were prescribed a meal plan low in dietary carbohydrate (~20%) or fat (~30%). BW and carbohydrate or fat grams were collected at each group meeting. Energy and macronutrient intake were assessed at baseline, 3, 6, and 9 months. The LC group increased BW from 89.2 +/- 14.4 kg at 3 months to 89.3 +/- 16.1 kg at 9 months (P = 0.84). The LF group decreased BW from 86.3 +/- 12.0 kg at 3 months to 86.0 +/- 14.0 kg at 9 months (P = 0.96). BW was not different between groups during weight maintenance (P = 0.87). Fifty-five percent (16/29) and 50% (13/26) of participants for the LC and LF groups, respectively, continued to decrease their body weight during weight maintenance. Following a 3 month liquid diet, the LC and LF diet groups were equally effective for BW maintenance over 6 months; however, there was significant variation in weight change within each group.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
France 1 1%
Unknown 68 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 19%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Researcher 8 11%
Other 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 12 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Engineering 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 17 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 27 September 2020.
All research outputs
#2,441,203
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#556
of 1,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,000
of 76,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#9
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 76,797 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.