↓ Skip to main content

All-Source Basal Vitamin D Inputs Are Greater Than Previously Thought and Cutaneous Inputs Are Smaller

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nutrition, March 2013
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Readers on

mendeley
87 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
All-Source Basal Vitamin D Inputs Are Greater Than Previously Thought and Cutaneous Inputs Are Smaller
Published in
Journal of Nutrition, March 2013
DOI 10.3945/jn.112.168641
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The magnitude of vitamin D inputs in individuals not taking supplements is unknown; however, there is a great deal of information on quantitative response to varying supplement doses. We reanalyzed individual 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] concentration data from 8 studies involving cholecalciferol supplementation (total sample size = 3000). We extrapolated individual study dose-response curves to zero concentration values for serum 25(OH)D by using both linear and curvilinear approaches and measured seasonal oscillation in the serum 25(OH)D concentration. The total basal input (food plus solar) was calculated to range from a low of 778 iu/d in patients with end-stage renal disease to a high of 2667 iu/d in healthy Caucasian adults. Consistent with expectations, obese individuals had lower baseline, unsupplemented 25(OH)D concentrations and a smaller response to supplements. Similarly, African Americans had both lower baseline concentrations and lower calculated basal, all-source inputs. Seasonal oscillation in 4 studies ranged from 5.20 to 11.4 nmol/L, reflecting a mean cutaneous synthesis of cholecalciferol ranging from 209 to 651 iu/d at the summer peak. We conclude that: 1) all-source, basal vitamin D inputs are approximately an order of magnitude higher than can be explained by traditional food sources; 2) cutaneous, solar input in these cohorts accounts for only 10-25% of unsupplemented input at the summer peak; and 3) the remainder must come from undocumented food sources, possibly in part as preformed 25(OH)D.

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 8 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 87 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 %
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 85 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Student > Master 11 13%
Other 8 9%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 18 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 01 January 2014.
All research outputs
#5,829,309
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nutrition
#4,090
of 12,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,102
of 245,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nutrition
#23
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,845 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 245,696 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 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 65% of its contemporaries.