↓ Skip to main content

Mechanisms of Weight Loss, Diabetes Control and Changes in Food Choices After Gastrointestinal Surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Current Atherosclerosis Reports, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
Title
Mechanisms of Weight Loss, Diabetes Control and Changes in Food Choices After Gastrointestinal Surgery
Published in
Current Atherosclerosis Reports, September 2012
DOI 10.1007/s11883-012-0283-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dimitrios Papamargaritis, Eleftheria Panteliou, Alexander D. Miras, Carel W. le Roux

Abstract

The long-term effects of lifestyle changes, diet and medical therapy on obesity are limited. Bariatric surgery is the most effective long-term treatment with the greatest chances for amelioration of obesity-associated complications, including type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). There is increasing evidence in the literature that bariatric operations have a profound effect on human physiology, by reducing hunger, increasing satiety, paradoxically increasing energy expenditure, and even promoting healthy food preferences. Some of these operations improve glucose homeostasis in patients with T2DM independently of weight loss. Changes in the gut hormone levels of glucagon-like peptide 1, peptide YY and ghrelin have been proposed as some of the mediators implicated in changing physiology. The aim of this review is to critically explore the current knowledge on the putative mechanisms of the change in weight and improvement in T2DM glycaemic control after the most commonly performed bariatric operations.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ireland 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 67 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 9%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 13 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Engineering 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 14 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 04 October 2012.
All research outputs
#14,734,103
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from Current Atherosclerosis Reports
#552
of 762 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,757
of 170,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Atherosclerosis Reports
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 762 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 170,921 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.