↓ Skip to main content

Renal lithiasis and nutrition

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, September 2006
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 (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
105 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
2 Connotea
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
Renal lithiasis and nutrition
Published in
Nutrition Journal, September 2006
DOI 10.1186/1475-2891-5-23
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felix Grases, Antonia Costa-Bauza, Rafel M Prieto

Abstract

Renal lithiasis is a multifactorial disease. An important number of etiologic factors can be adequately modified through diet, since it must be considered that the urine composition is directly related to diet. In fact, the change of inappropriate habitual diet patterns should be the main measure to prevent kidney stones. In this paper, the relation between different dietary factors (liquid intake, pH, calcium, phosphate, oxalate, citrate, phytate, urate and vitamins) and each type of renal stone (calcium oxalate monohydrate papillary, calcium oxalate monohydrate unattached, calcium oxalate dihydrate, calcium oxalate dihydrate/hydroxyapatite, hydroxyapatite, struvite infectious, brushite, uric acid, calcium oxalate/uric acid and cystine) is discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 165 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 37 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 8%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Master 12 7%
Other 38 23%
Unknown 38 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 7%
Chemistry 9 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 2%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 43 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 26 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,697,890
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#430
of 1,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,239
of 88,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#2
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,517 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 88,417 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.