↓ Skip to main content

Glycemic index, glycemic load and endometrial cancer risk: results from the Australian National Endometrial Cancer study and an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Nutrition, May 2012
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)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 X user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Glycemic index, glycemic load and endometrial cancer risk: results from the Australian National Endometrial Cancer study and an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
European Journal of Nutrition, May 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00394-012-0376-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christina M. Nagle, Catherine M. Olsen, Torukiri I. Ibiebele, Amanda B. Spurdle, Penelope M. Webb, The Australian National Endometrial Cancer Study Group, The Australian Ovarian Cancer Study Group

Abstract

The relationship between habitual consumption of foods with a high glycemic index (GI) and/or a diet with a high glycemic load (GL) and risk of endometrial cancer is uncertain, and relatively few studies have investigated these associations. The objectives of this study were to examine the association between GI/GL and risk of endometrial cancer using data from an Australian population-based case-control study and systematically review all the available evidence to quantify the magnitude of the association using meta-analysis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 82 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 14%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 21 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 25 30%
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 16 May 2022.
All research outputs
#4,429,986
of 22,715,151 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nutrition
#878
of 2,385 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,500
of 164,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nutrition
#12
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,715,151 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 2,385 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 164,287 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 38 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 71% of its contemporaries.