↓ Skip to main content

Health Effects of Fructose and Fructose-Containing Caloric Sweeteners: Where Do We Stand 10 Years After the Initial Whistle Blowings?

Overview of attention for article published in Current Diabetes Reports, June 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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 Mendeley
Title
Health Effects of Fructose and Fructose-Containing Caloric Sweeteners: Where Do We Stand 10 Years After the Initial Whistle Blowings?
Published in
Current Diabetes Reports, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11892-015-0627-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luc Tappy, Kim-Anne Lê

Abstract

Suspicion that fructose-containing caloric sweeteners (FCCS) may play a causal role in the development of metabolic diseases has elicited intense basic and clinical research over the past 10 years. Prospective cohort studies converge to indicate that FCCS, and more specifically sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), consumption is associated with weight gain over time. Intervention studies in which FCCS or SSB consumption is altered while food intake is otherwise left ad libitum indicate that increased FCCS generally increases total energy intake and body weight, while FCCS reduction decreases body weight gain. Clinical trials assessing the effects of SSB reduction as a sole intervention however fail to observe clinically significant weight loss. Many mechanistic studies indicate that excess FCCS can cause potential adverse metabolic effects. Whether this is associated with a long-term risk remains unknown. Scientific evidence that excess FCCS intake causes more deleterious effects to health than excess of other macronutrients is presently lacking. However, the large consumption of FCCS in the population makes it one out of several targets for the treatment and prevention of metabolic diseases.

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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 123 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 18%
Student > Bachelor 21 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 12%
Researcher 14 11%
Other 7 6%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 26 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 9%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 30 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 04 January 2024.
All research outputs
#1,430,694
of 25,303,733 outputs
Outputs from Current Diabetes Reports
#70
of 1,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,325
of 270,458 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Diabetes Reports
#3
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,303,733 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,050 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 270,458 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 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 90% of its contemporaries.