↓ Skip to main content

Sodium-Reduced Meat and Poultry Products Contain a Significant Amount of Potassium from Food Additives

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Sodium-Reduced Meat and Poultry Products Contain a Significant Amount of Potassium from Food Additives
Published in
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, January 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.jand.2017.10.025
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arti Sharma Parpia, Marc B. Goldstein, JoAnne Arcand, France Cho, Mary R. L’Abbé, Pauline B. Darling

Abstract

Sodium-reduced packaged food products are increasingly available to consumers; however, it is not clear whether they are suitable for inclusion in a potassium-reduced diet. For individuals with impaired renal potassium excretion caused by chronic kidney disease and for those taking certain medications that interfere with the rennin-angiotensin aldosterone axis, the need to limit dietary potassium is important in view of the risk for development of hyperkalemia and fatal cardiac arrhythmias. The primary objective of this study was to determine the impact of the reduction of sodium in packaged meat and poultry products (MPPs) on the content of potassium and phosphorus from food additives. This was a cross-sectional study comparing chemically analyzed MPPs (n=38, n=19 original, n=19 sodium-reduced), selected from the top three grocery chains in Canada, based on market share sales. All MPPs with a package label containing a reduced sodium content claim together with their non-sodium-reduced packaged MPP counterparts were selected for analysis. The protein, sodium, phosphorus, and potassium contents of sodium-reduced MPPs and the non-sodium-reduced (original) MPP counterparts were chemically analyzed according to the Association of Analytical Communities official methods 992.15 and 984.27 and compared by using a paired t test. The frequency of phosphorus and potassium additives appearing on the product labels' ingredient lists were compared between groups by using McNemar's test. Sodium-reduced MPPs (n=19) contained 44% more potassium (mg/100 g) than their non-sodium-reduced counterparts (n=19) (mean difference [95% CI): 184 [90-279]; P=0.001). The potassium content of sodium-reduced MPPs varied widely and ranged from 210 to 1,500 mg/100 g. Potassium-containing additives were found on the ingredient list in 63% of the sodium-reduced products and 26% of the non-sodium-reduced products (P=0.02). Sodium-reduced MPPs contained 38% less sodium (mg/100 g) than their non-sodium-reduced counterparts (mean difference [95% CI]: 486 [334-638]; P<0.001). The amounts of phosphorus and protein, as well as the frequency of phosphorus additives appearing on the product label ingredient list, did not significantly differ between the two groups. Potassium additives are frequently added to sodium-reduced MPPs in amounts that significantly contribute to the potassium load for patients with impaired renal handling of potassium caused by chronic kidney disease and certain medications. Patients requiring potassium restriction should be counseled to be cautious regarding the potassium content of sodium-reduced MPPs and encouraged to make food choices accordingly.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 20%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 29 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 35 51%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 28 March 2019.
All research outputs
#1,836,578
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
#650
of 3,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,310
of 449,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
#8
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,668 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 449,402 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.