| Title |
Carbohydrate quality changes and concurrent changes in cardiovascular risk factors: a longitudinal analysis in the PREDIMED-Plus randomized trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, February 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1093/ajcn/nqz298 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Miguel A Martínez-González, Cesar I Fernandez-Lazaro, Estefanía Toledo, Andrés Díaz-López, Dolores Corella, Albert Goday, Dora Romaguera, Jesús Vioque, Ángel M Alonso-Gómez, Julia Wärnberg, J Alfredo Martínez, Luís Serra-Majem, Ramon Estruch, Francisco J Tinahones, José Lapetra, Xavier Pintó, Josep A Tur, José López-Miranda, Naomi Cano-Ibáñez, Miguel Delgado-Rodríguez, Pilar Matía-Martín, Lidia Daimiel, Vicente Martín Sánchez, Josep Vidal, Clotilde Vázquez, Emilio Ros, Pilar Buil-Cosiales, Olga Portoles, María Soria-Florido, Jadwiga Konieczna, Eva M Navarrete-Muñoz, Lucas Tojal-Sierra, José C Fernández-García, Itziar Abete, Patricia Henríquez-Sánchez, Araceli Muñoz-Garach, José M Santos-Lozano, Emili Corbella, Maria Del Mar Bibiloni, Nerea Becerra-Tomás, Rocío Barragán, Olga Castañer, Miquel Fiol, Manoli García de la Hera, María C Belló-Mora, Alfredo Gea, Nancy Babio, Montse Fitó, Miguel Ruiz-Canela, Itziar Zazpe, Jordi Salas-Salvadó |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 13 | 46% |
| United States | 3 | 11% |
| Mexico | 2 | 7% |
| Argentina | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Finland | 1 | 4% |
| Greece | 1 | 4% |
| Germany | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 19 | 68% |
| Scientists | 5 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 236 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 236 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 49 | 21% |
| Unknown | 90 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 36 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 4% |
| Engineering | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 31 | 13% |
| Unknown | 107 | 45% |
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 02 May 2022.
All research outputs
#584,939
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#1,313
of 12,718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,804
of 476,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#18
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 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 12,718 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 476,916 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 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.