↓ Skip to main content

Low-Fat Dietary Pattern and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: The Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, February 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
352 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 Mendeley
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.
Title
Low-Fat Dietary Pattern and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: The Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial
Published in
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, February 2006
DOI 10.1001/jama.295.6.643
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shirley A. A. Beresford, Karen C. Johnson, Cheryl Ritenbaugh, Norman L. Lasser, Linda G. Snetselaar, Henry R. Black, Garnet L. Anderson, Annlouise R. Assaf, Tamsen Bassford, Deborah Bowen, Robert L. Brunner, Robert G. Brzyski, Bette Caan, Rowan T. Chlebowski, Margery Gass, Rosanne C. Harrigan, Jennifer Hays, David Heber, Gerardo Heiss, Susan L. Hendrix, Barbara V. Howard, Judith Hsia, F. Allan Hubbell, Rebecca D. Jackson, Jane Morley Kotchen, Lewis H. Kuller, Andrea Z. LaCroix, Dorothy S. Lane, Robert D. Langer, Cora E. Lewis, JoAnn E. Manson, Karen L. Margolis, Yasmin Mossavar-Rahmani, Judith K. Ockene, Linda M. Parker, Michael G. Perri, Lawrence Phillips, Ross L. Prentice, John Robbins, Jacques E. Rossouw, Gloria E. Sarto, Marcia L. Stefanick, Linda Van Horn, Mara Z. Vitolins, Jean Wactawski-Wende, Robert B. Wallace, Evelyn Whitlock

Abstract

Observational studies and polyp recurrence trials are not conclusive regarding the effects of a low-fat dietary pattern on risk of colorectal cancer, necessitating a primary prevention trial.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 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 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 181 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 31 16%
Student > Bachelor 24 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 11%
Other 21 11%
Student > Master 19 10%
Other 45 23%
Unknown 34 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 69 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 6%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Other 28 14%
Unknown 42 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 313. 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 October 2023.
All research outputs
#109,198
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#1,767
of 36,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184
of 171,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
#7
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 36,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 72.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 171,459 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 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.