↓ Skip to main content

Estimation of Chicken Intake by Adults Using Metabolomics-Derived Markers

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nutrition, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Estimation of Chicken Intake by Adults Using Metabolomics-Derived Markers
Published in
Journal of Nutrition, October 2017
DOI 10.3945/jn.117.252197
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaofei Yin, Helena Gibbons, Milena Rundle, Gary Frost, Breige A McNulty, Anne P Nugent, Janette Walton, Albert Flynn, Michael J Gibney, Lorraine Brennan

Abstract

Background: Improved assessment of meat intake with the use of metabolomics-derived markers can provide objective data and could be helpful in clarifying proposed associations between meat intake and health.Objective: The objective of this study was to identify novel markers of chicken intake using a metabolomics approach and use markers to determine intake in an independent cohort.Methods: Ten participants [age: 62 y; body mass index (in kg/m(2)): 28.25] in the NutriTech food intake study consumed increasing amounts of chicken, from 88 to 290 g/d, in a 3-wk span. Urine and blood samples were analyzed by nuclear magnetic resonance and mass spectrometry, respectively. A multivariate data analysis was performed to identify markers associated with chicken intake. A calibration curve was built based on dose-response association using NutriTech data. A Bland-Altman analysis evaluated the agreement between reported and calculated chicken intake in a National Adult Nutrition Survey cohort.Results: Multivariate data analysis of postprandial and fasting urine samples collected in participants in the NutriTech study revealed good discrimination between high (290 g/d) and low (88 g/d) chicken intakes. Urinary metabolite profiles showed differences in metabolite levels between low and high chicken intakes. Examining metabolite profiles revealed that guanidoacetate increased from 1.47 to 3.66 mmol/L following increasing chicken intakes from 88 to 290 g/d (P < 0.01). Using a calibration curve developed from the NutriTech study, chicken intake was calculated through the use of data from the National Adult Nutrition Survey, in which consumers of chicken had a higher guanidoacetate excretion (0.70 mmol/L) than did nonconsumers (0.47 mmol/L; P < 0.01). A Bland-Altman analysis revealed good agreement between reported and calculated intakes, with a bias of -30.2 g/d. Plasma metabolite analysis demonstrated that 3-methylhistidine was a more suitable indicator of chicken intake than 1-methylhistidine.Conclusions: Guanidoacetate was successfully identified and confirmed as a marker of chicken intake, and its measurement in fasting urine samples could be used to determine chicken intake in a free-living population. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01684917.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 14 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Chemistry 5 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 18 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,850,834
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nutrition
#4,752
of 9,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,698
of 331,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nutrition
#23
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,884 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 331,218 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 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 58% of its contemporaries.