↓ Skip to main content

Oral intake of encapsulated dried ginger root powder hardly affects human thermoregulatory function, but appears to facilitate fat utilization

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Biometeorology, January 2015
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 (81st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
11 Facebook pages
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Oral intake of encapsulated dried ginger root powder hardly affects human thermoregulatory function, but appears to facilitate fat utilization
Published in
International Journal of Biometeorology, January 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00484-015-0957-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mayumi Miyamoto, Kentaro Matsuzaki, Masanori Katakura, Toshiko Hara, Yoko Tanabe, Osamu Shido

Abstract

The present study investigated the impact of a single oral ingestion of ginger on thermoregulatory function and fat oxidation in humans. Morning and afternoon oral intake of 1.0 g dried ginger root powder did not alter rectal temperature, skin blood flow, O2 consumption, CO2 production, and thermal sensation and comfort, or induce sweating at an ambient temperature of 28 °C. Ginger ingestion had no effect on threshold temperatures for skin blood flow or thermal sweating. Serum levels of free fatty acids were significantly elevated at 120 min after ginger ingestion in both the morning and afternoon. Morning ginger intake significantly reduced respiratory exchange ratios and elevated fat oxidation by 13.5 % at 120 min after ingestion. This was not the case in the afternoon. These results suggest that the effect of a single oral ginger administration on the peripheral and central thermoregulatory function is miniscule, but does facilitate fat utilization although the timing of the administration may be relevant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 51 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Researcher 4 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Other 11 21%
Unknown 19 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 22 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 03 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,489,222
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Biometeorology
#507
of 1,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,600
of 352,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Biometeorology
#5
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,294 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 352,275 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.