↓ Skip to main content

Nutrition and sarcopenia: evidence for an interaction

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
157 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
Nutrition and sarcopenia: evidence for an interaction
Published in
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, March 2012
DOI 10.1017/s0029665112000201
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Nutritional interventions that might influence sarcopenia, as indicated by literature reporting on sarcopenia per se as well as dynapenia and frailty, are reviewed in relation to potential physiological aetiological factors, i.e. inactivity, anabolic resistance, inflammation, acidosis and vitamin D deficiency. As sarcopenia occurs in physically active and presumably well-nourished populations, it is argued that a simple nutritional aetiology is unlikely and unequivocal evidence for any nutritional influence is extremely limited. Dietary protein is probably the most widely researched nutrient but only for frailty is there one study showing evidence of an aetiological influence and most intervention studies with protein or amino acids have proved ineffective with only a very few exceptions. Fish oil has been shown to attenuate anabolic resistance of muscle protein synthesis in one study. There is limited evidence for a protective influence of antioxidants and inducers of phase 2 proteins on sarcopenia, dynapenia and anabolic resistance in human and animal studies. Also fruit and vegetables may protect against acidosis-induced sarcopenia through their provision of dietary potassium. While severe vitamin D deficiency is associated with dynapenia and sarcopenia, the evidence for a beneficial influence of increasing vitamin D status above the severe deficiency level is limited and controversial, especially in men. On this basis there is insufficient evidence for any more specific nutritional advice than that contained in the general healthy lifestyle-healthy diet message: i.e. avoiding inactivity and low intakes of food energy and nutrients and maintain an active lifestyle with a diet providing a rich supply of fruit and vegetables and frequent oily fish.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 157 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 %
Portugal 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 152 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 16%
Student > Bachelor 18 11%
Researcher 14 9%
Professor 11 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Other 34 22%
Unknown 44 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 11%
Sports and Recreations 15 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 6%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 50 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 March 2012.
All research outputs
#24,631,337
of 27,369,606 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Nutrition Society
#1,707
of 1,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,495
of 176,904 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Nutrition Society
#22
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,369,606 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,874 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 176,904 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.