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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Correlation of magnesium intake with metabolic parameters, depression and physical activity in elderly type 2 diabetes patients: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2891-11-41 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jui-Hua Huang, Yi-Fa Lu, Fu-Chou Cheng, John Ning-Yuean Lee, Leih-Ching Tsai |
| Abstract |
Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a major global public health problem in the worldwide and is increasing in aging populations. Magnesium intake may be one of the most important factors for diabetes prevention and management. Low magnesium intake may exacerbate metabolic abnormalities. In this study, the relationships of magnesium intake with metabolic parameters, depression and physical activity in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes were investigated. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 13% |
| Spain | 3 | 13% |
| Mexico | 2 | 8% |
| Greece | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Argentina | 1 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 4% |
| Ireland | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 46% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 17 | 71% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 176 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 38 | 21% |
| Researcher | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 15% |
| Unknown | 40 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 48 | 27% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 9% |
| Psychology | 16 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 12% |
| Unknown | 47 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 08 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,621,928
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#422
of 1,530 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,142
of 181,597 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#5
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 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 1,530 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 181,597 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.