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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Maternal nutrition, intrauterine programming and consequential risks in the offspring
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders, July 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11154-008-9087-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chittaranjan S. Yajnik, Urmila S. Deshmukh |
| Abstract |
It is traditionally believed that genetic susceptibility and adult faulty lifestyle lead to type 2 diabetes, a chronic non-communicable disease. The "Developmental Origins of Health and Disease" (DOHaD) model proposes that the susceptibility to type 2 diabetes originates in the intrauterine life by environmental fetal programming, further exaggerated by rapid childhood growth, i.e. a biphasic nutritional insult. Both fetal under nutrition (sometimes manifested as low birth weight) and over nutrition (the baby of a diabetic mother) increase the risk of future diabetes. The common characteristic of these two types of babies is their high adiposity. An imbalance in nutrition seems to play an important role, and micronutrients seem particularly important. Normal to high maternal folate status coupled with low vitamin B(12) status predicted higher adiposity and insulin resistance in Indian babies. Thus, 1-C (methyl) metabolism seems to play a key role in fetal programming. DOHaD represents a paradigm shift in the model for prevention of the chronic non-communicable diseases. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 198 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 2% |
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| Brazil | 2 | 1% |
| Denmark | 2 | 1% |
| Cameroon | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 182 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 36 | 18% |
| Researcher | 33 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 42 | 21% |
| Unknown | 30 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 51 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 42 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 12% |
| Unknown | 31 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 18 December 2016.
All research outputs
#7,942,395
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
#219
of 505 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,333
of 85,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reviews in Endocrine and Metabolic Disorders
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 505 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 85,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.