↓ Skip to main content

Review of the nutritional benefits and risks related to intense sweeteners

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Public Health, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#7 of 611)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
8 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
159 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
Review of the nutritional benefits and risks related to intense sweeteners
Published in
Archives of Public Health, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13690-015-0092-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olivier Bruyère, Serge H. Ahmed, Catherine Atlan, Jacques Belegaud, Murielle Bortolotti, Marie-Chantal Canivenc-Lavier, Sybil Charrière, Jean-Philippe Girardet, Sabine Houdart, Esther Kalonji, Perrine Nadaud, Fabienne Rajas, Gérard Slama, Irène Margaritis

Abstract

The intense sweeteners currently authorised in Europe comprise ten compounds of various chemical natures. Their overall use has sharply risen in the last 20 years. These compounds are mainly used to formulate reduced-calorie products while maintaining sweetness. This extensive analysis of the literature reviews the data currently available on the potential nutritional benefits and risks related to the consumption of products containing intense sweeteners. Regarding nutritional benefits, the available studies, while numerous, do not provide proof that the consumption of artificial sweeteners as sugar substitutes is beneficial in terms of weight management, blood glucose regulation in diabetic subjects or the incidence of type 2 diabetes. Regarding nutritional risks (incidence of type 2 diabetes, habituation to sweetness in adults, cancers, etc.), it is not possible based on the available data to establish a link between the occurrence of these risks and the consumption of artificial sweeteners. However, some studies underline the need to improve knowledge of the links between intense sweeteners consumption and certain risks.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 159 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 155 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 41 26%
Student > Master 29 18%
Researcher 21 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 6%
Other 8 5%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 31 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Other 16 10%
Unknown 38 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 80. 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 11 June 2020.
All research outputs
#326,706
of 17,939,930 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Public Health
#7
of 611 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,366
of 260,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Public Health
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,939,930 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 611 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 260,874 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them