↓ Skip to main content

Effect of changing the amount and type of fat and carbohydrate on insulin sensitivity and cardiovascular risk: the RISCK (Reading, Imperial, Surrey, Cambridge, and Kings) trial

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, August 2010
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 (97th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
11 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
166 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
182 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
Effect of changing the amount and type of fat and carbohydrate on insulin sensitivity and cardiovascular risk: the RISCK (Reading, Imperial, Surrey, Cambridge, and Kings) trial
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, August 2010
DOI 10.3945/ajcn.2009.29096
Pubmed ID
Authors

Susan A Jebb, Julie A Lovegrove, Bruce A Griffin, Gary S Frost, Carmel S Moore, Mark D Chatfield, Les J Bluck, Christine M Williams, Thomas AB Sanders, RISCK Study Group

Abstract

Insulin sensitivity (Si) is improved by weight loss and exercise, but the effects of the replacement of saturated fatty acids (SFAs) with monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) or carbohydrates of high glycemic index (HGI) or low glycemic index (LGI) are uncertain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
United States 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 176 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 13%
Researcher 22 12%
Student > Bachelor 20 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 6%
Other 35 19%
Unknown 35 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 7%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 50 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 42. 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 12 August 2023.
All research outputs
#983,134
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#1,927
of 12,612 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,781
of 103,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#19
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,612 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 103,379 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 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.