↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of dietary, nutritional, and physical activity interventions for the prevention of prostate cancer progression and mortality

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Causes & Control, September 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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
9 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
275 Mendeley
Title
A systematic review of dietary, nutritional, and physical activity interventions for the prevention of prostate cancer progression and mortality
Published in
Cancer Causes & Control, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10552-015-0659-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucy E. Hackshaw-McGeagh, Rachel E. Perry, Verity A. Leach, Sara Qandil, Mona Jeffreys, Richard M. Martin, J. Athene Lane

Abstract

Given the long-term, although potentially fatal, nature of prostate cancer, there is increasing observational evidence for the reduction in disease progression and mortality through changes in lifestyle factors. We systematically reviewed dietary, nutritional, and physical activity randomized interventions aimed at modifying prostate cancer progression and disease-specific mortality, including a detailed assessment of risk of bias and methodological quality. Forty-four randomized controlled trials of lifestyle interventions, with prostate cancer progression or mortality outcomes, were identified. Substantial heterogeneity of the data prevented a meta-analysis. The included trials involved 3,418 prostate cancer patients, median 64 men per trial, from 13 countries. A trial of a nutritional supplement of pomegranate seed, green tea, broccoli, and turmeric; a trial comparing flaxseed, low-fat diet, flaxseed, and low-fat diet versus usual diet; and a trial supplementing soy, lycopene, selenium, and coenzyme Q10, all demonstrated beneficial effects. These trials were also assessed as having low risk of bias and high methodological quality (as were seven other trials with no evidence of benefit). The remaining trials were either underpowered, at high or unclear risk of bias, inadequately reported, of short duration or measured surrogate outcomes of unproven relationship to mortality or disease progression, which precluded any benefits reported being reliable. Large, well-designed randomized trials with clinical endpoints are recommended for lifestyle modification interventions.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 270 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 53 19%
Student > Bachelor 35 13%
Researcher 32 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 7%
Other 48 17%
Unknown 62 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 83 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 5%
Sports and Recreations 9 3%
Other 43 16%
Unknown 74 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 26 February 2024.
All research outputs
#1,640,146
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes & Control
#155
of 2,271 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,630
of 280,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes & Control
#4
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,271 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. 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 280,283 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 91% of its contemporaries.