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 |
Relation between Breast Cancer and High Glycemic Index or Glycemic Load: A Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1080/10408398.2012.718723 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick Mullie, Alice Koechlin, Mathieu Boniol, Philippe Autier, Peter Boyle |
| Abstract |
Abstract (n=197) Breast cancer is the commonest form of cancer in women worldwide. It has been suggested that chronic hyperinsulinemia associated with insulin resistance plays a role in breast cancer etiology. To test the hyperinsulinemia hypothesis, a dietary pattern associated with a high glycemic index and glycemic load, both proxies for chronic hyperinsulinemia, should be associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. A meta-analysis restricted to prospective cohort studies was undertaken using a random effects model with tests for statistical significance, publication bias and heterogeneity. The metric for analysis was the risk of breast cancer in the highest relative to the lowest glycemic index and glycemic load dietary pattern. A dietary pattern with a high glycemic index was associated with a summary relative risk (SRR) of 1.05 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.11), and a high glycemic load with a SRR of 1.06 (95% CI: 1.00, 1.13). Adjustments for body mass index, physical activity and other lifestyle factors did not influence the SRR, nor did menopausal status and estrogen receptor status of the tumor. In conclusion, the current evidence supports a modest association between a dietary pattern with high glycemic index or glycemic load and the risk of breast cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 99 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 20 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 27 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 33 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,805,023
of 22,794,367 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition
#1,541
of 2,356 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,784
of 258,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition
#63
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,794,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,356 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.3. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 258,624 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.