↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of isocaloric very low carbohydrate/high saturated fat and high carbohydrate/low saturated fat diets on body composition and cardiovascular risk

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition & Metabolism, January 2006
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 (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
78 tweeters
facebook
7 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor
q&a
1 Q&A thread
video
10 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
229 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
Comparison of isocaloric very low carbohydrate/high saturated fat and high carbohydrate/low saturated fat diets on body composition and cardiovascular risk
Published in
Nutrition & Metabolism, January 2006
DOI 10.1186/1743-7075-3-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manny Noakes, Paul R Foster, Jennifer B Keogh, Anthony P James, John C Mamo, Peter M Clifton

Abstract

It is speculated that high saturated fat very low carbohydrate diets (VLCARB) have adverse effects on cardiovascular risk but evidence for this in controlled studies is lacking. The objective of this study was to compare, under isocaloric conditions, the effects of a VLCARB to 2 low saturated fat high carbohydrate diets on body composition and cardiovascular risk.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 78 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 229 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 219 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 59 26%
Student > Master 41 18%
Other 24 10%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Postgraduate 20 9%
Other 36 16%
Unknown 26 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 29 13%
Sports and Recreations 19 8%
Other 31 14%
Unknown 31 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 74. 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 04 April 2022.
All research outputs
#437,570
of 21,340,745 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition & Metabolism
#74
of 906 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,819
of 247,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition & Metabolism
#11
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,340,745 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 906 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 247,595 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 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.