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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Dietary fat and breast cancer: comparison of results from food diaries and food-frequency questionnaires in the UK Dietary Cohort Consortium
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.3945/ajcn.111.015735 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Timothy J Key, Paul N Appleby, Benjamin J Cairns, Robert Luben, Christina C Dahm, Tasnime Akbaraly, Eric J Brunner, Victoria Burley, Janet E Cade, Darren C Greenwood, Alison M Stephen, Gita Mishra, Diana Kuh, Ruth H Keogh, Ian R White, Amit Bhaniani, Gabor Borgulya, Angela A Mulligan, Kay Tee Khaw |
| Abstract |
Epidemiologic studies of dietary fat and breast cancer risk are inconsistent, and it has been suggested that a true relation may have been obscured by the imprecise measurement of fat intake. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 69 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 13% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 22% |
| Unknown | 21 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 11% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 12% |
| Unknown | 25 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 April 2013.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#7,841
of 12,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,759
of 134,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#61
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,613 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 134,584 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.