↓ Skip to main content

The Preventable Causes of Death in the United States: Comparative Risk Assessment of Dietary, Lifestyle, and Metabolic Risk Factors

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS Medicine, April 2009
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
1524 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1470 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
connotea
1 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
The Preventable Causes of Death in the United States: Comparative Risk Assessment of Dietary, Lifestyle, and Metabolic Risk Factors
Published in
PLOS Medicine, April 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000058
Pubmed ID
Authors

Goodarz Danaei, Eric L. Ding, Dariush Mozaffarian, Ben Taylor, Jürgen Rehm, Christopher J. L. Murray, Majid Ezzati

Abstract

Knowledge of the number of deaths caused by risk factors is needed for health policy and priority setting. Our aim was to estimate the mortality effects of the following 12 modifiable dietary, lifestyle, and metabolic risk factors in the United States (US) using consistent and comparable methods: high blood glucose, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and blood pressure; overweight-obesity; high dietary trans fatty acids and salt; low dietary polyunsaturated fatty acids, omega-3 fatty acids (seafood), and fruits and vegetables; physical inactivity; alcohol use; and tobacco smoking.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 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 1,470 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 36 2%
United Kingdom 10 <1%
Germany 4 <1%
Brazil 4 <1%
Australia 4 <1%
Switzerland 2 <1%
Portugal 2 <1%
South Africa 2 <1%
Saudi Arabia 2 <1%
Other 14 <1%
Unknown 1390 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 234 16%
Researcher 209 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 209 14%
Student > Bachelor 167 11%
Other 86 6%
Other 317 22%
Unknown 248 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 387 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 141 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 128 9%
Social Sciences 120 8%
Psychology 97 7%
Other 286 19%
Unknown 311 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 631. 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 20 March 2024.
All research outputs
#35,274
of 25,529,543 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#120
of 5,197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38
of 104,276 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#1
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,529,543 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 5,197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 77.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 104,276 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 99% of its contemporaries.