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 |
The Kidney–Gut Axis: Implications for Nutrition Care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of renal nutrition (Print), March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1053/j.jrn.2015.01.017 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Megan Rossi, David W. Johnson, Katrina L. Campbell |
| Abstract |
There is increasing clinical evidence that patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a distinctly dysbiotic intestinal bacterial community, termed the gut microbiota, which in turn drives a cascade of metabolic abnormalities, including uremic toxin production, inflammation, and immunosuppression, that ultimately promotes progressive kidney failure and cardiovascular disease. As the gut microbiota is intimately influenced by diet, the discovery of the kidney-gut axis has created new therapeutic opportunities for nutritional intervention. This review discusses the metabolic pathways linking dysbiotic gut microbiota with adverse health outcomes in patients with CKD, as well as novel therapeutic strategies for targeting these pathways involving dietary protein, fiber, prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics. These emerging nutritional interventions may ultimately lead to a paradigm shift in the conventional focus of dietary management in CKD. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 3 | 33% |
| South Africa | 2 | 22% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Australia | 1 | 11% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 44% |
| Members of the public | 4 | 44% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 113 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 17% |
| Researcher | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 26 | 23% |
| Unknown | 27 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 13 | 11% |
| Unknown | 32 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 20 March 2018.
All research outputs
#1,935,303
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of renal nutrition (Print)
#100
of 942 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,573
of 278,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of renal nutrition (Print)
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 942 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 278,101 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 91% 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.