| Title |
Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Type 2 Diabetes: Common Pathophysiologic Mechanisms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Diabetes Reports, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11892-015-0607-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chiara Saponaro, Melania Gaggini, Amalia Gastaldelli |
| Abstract |
Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is an independent risk factor for advanced liver disease, type 2 diabetes (T2DM), and cardiovascular diseases. The prevalence of NAFLD in the general population is around 30 %, but it is up to three times higher in those with T2DM. Among people with obesity and T2DM, the NAFLD epidemic also is worsening. Therefore, it is important to identify early metabolic alterations and to prevent these diseases and their progression. In this review, we analyze the pathophysiologic mechanisms leading to NAFLD, particularly, those common to T2DM, such as liver and muscle insulin resistance. However, it is mainly adipose tissue insulin resistance that results in increased hepatic de novo lipogenesis, inflammation, and lipotoxicity. Although genetics predispose to NAFLD, an unhealthy lifestyle, including high-fat/high-sugar diets and low physical activity, increases the risk. In addition, alterations in gut microbiota and environmental chemical agents, acting as endocrine disruptors, may play a role. |
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 | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 173 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Malaysia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 170 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 25 | 14% |
| Researcher | 22 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 8% |
| Other | 23 | 13% |
| Unknown | 59 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 18 | 10% |
| Unknown | 64 | 37% |
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 06 September 2015.
All research outputs
#14,724,101
of 23,576,969 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#603
of 1,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,543
of 266,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#9
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,576,969 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,024 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 266,148 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.