↓ Skip to main content

Long-term effects of low glycemic index/load vs. high glycemic index/load diets on parameters of obesity and obesity-associated risks: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 1,996)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
23 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
5 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
220 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
400 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Long-term effects of low glycemic index/load vs. high glycemic index/load diets on parameters of obesity and obesity-associated risks: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases, June 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.numecd.2013.04.008
Pubmed ID
Authors

L. Schwingshackl, G. Hoffmann

Abstract

The aim of the present meta-analysis was to investigate the long-term effects of glycemic index-related diets in the management of obesity with a special emphasis on the potential benefits of low glycemic index/load (GI/GL) in the prevention of obesity-associated risks.

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 400 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 393 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 75 19%
Student > Bachelor 53 13%
Researcher 45 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 9%
Student > Postgraduate 27 7%
Other 70 18%
Unknown 96 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 87 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 56 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 5%
Social Sciences 14 4%
Other 53 13%
Unknown 111 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 233. 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 05 February 2024.
All research outputs
#165,072
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases
#17
of 1,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#978
of 212,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases
#1
of 11 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 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,996 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 212,542 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 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.