↓ Skip to main content

Folic acid and neural tube defects: Discovery, debate and the need for policy change

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Screening, June 2022
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 665)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
17 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
27 X users
reddit
3 Redditors
podcasts
1 podcast

Readers on

mendeley
136 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.
Article details
Title
Folic acid and neural tube defects: Discovery, debate and the need for policy change
Published in
Journal of Medical Screening, June 2022
DOI 10.1177/09691413221102321
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Neural tube defects (NTDs) are a group of relatively common fatal or severely disabling birth defects that result in about 300,000 cases a year world-wide. The search for a cause was elusive, but in 1991 it was shown that about 8 out of 10 cases are due to a lack of vitamin B9 (folate) and are therefore preventable. This article (i) describes the challenge in finding the cause; (ii) examines the reasons for the failure of many countries to introduce folic acid fortification of staple foods such as flour and rice; (iii) shows that countries that have introduced fortification failed to do so in a fully effective way; (iv) shows how current preventive polices are confusing, inconsistent and sub-optimal; (v) shows that the proposed UK folic acid fortification policy is expected to prevent about 1 out of 10 NTD cases only; and (vi) proposes a simple, fully effective fortification policy that would prevent about 8 out of 10 NTDs and avoid the need for women to start taking folic acid supplements before pregnancy, a policy that has been shown to fail because only a small percentage of women adopt this practice.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 136 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Student > Master 11 8%
Unspecified 6 4%
Researcher 6 4%
Other 5 4%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 78 57%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Unspecified 6 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 81 60%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 158. 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 20 August 2026.
All research outputs
#321,475
of 34,176,807 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Screening
#4
of 665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,277
of 470,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Screening
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,176,807 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 665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 470,220 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them