↓ Skip to main content

A critical overview on the biological and molecular features of red and processed meat in colorectal carcinogenesis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gastroenterology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#3 of 1,156)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
10 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
Title
A critical overview on the biological and molecular features of red and processed meat in colorectal carcinogenesis
Published in
Journal of Gastroenterology, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00535-016-1294-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arunan Jeyakumar, Lakal Dissabandara, Vinod Gopalan

Abstract

A recent investigation by the World Health Organisation (WHO) has found that the consumption of processed meat and potentially red meat promotes carcinogenesis and can increase the risk of colorectal cancer. This literature review aims to summarise both the red and processed meat molecules associated with colorectal carcinogenesis and investigate their relationship with the pathogenic process of colorectal cancer. Literature relating to the carcinogenic effect of red and processed meat molecules was critically reviewed. There are multiple molecules present in red and processed meat with a potential carcinogenic effect on colorectal tissues. Processed meat is more carcinogenic compared to red meat because of the abundance of potent nitrosyl-heme molecules that form N-nitroso compounds. Studies have also noted that other molecules such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocyclic amines have potential mechanisms for the initiation of colorectal cancer pathogenesis. The non-human sugar molecule N-glycolylneuraminic acid may account for the carcinogenic effects of pork despite its heme content being comparable to that of chicken. Red meat products, especially those that have been processed, have a wide variety of carcinogenic molecules known to increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Thus, the outcome of this review is consistent with the recent findings of WHO.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Unknown 117 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Student > Master 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Researcher 9 8%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 31 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 3%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 35 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 121. 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 16 July 2023.
All research outputs
#332,306
of 24,723,421 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastroenterology
#3
of 1,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,992
of 426,147 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastroenterology
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,723,421 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 426,147 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 16 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 93% of its contemporaries.