↓ Skip to main content

SECONDARY HYPERPARATHYROIDISM AFTER BARIATRIC SURGERY: TREATMENT IS WITH CALCIUM CARBONATE OR CALCIUM CITRATE?

Overview of attention for article published in ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo), January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#44 of 315)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
SECONDARY HYPERPARATHYROIDISM AFTER BARIATRIC SURGERY: TREATMENT IS WITH CALCIUM CARBONATE OR CALCIUM CITRATE?
Published in
ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo), January 2015
DOI 10.1590/s0102-6720201500s100013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giorgio Alfredo Pedroso Baretta, Maria Paula Carlini Cambi, Arieli Luz Rodrigues, Silvana Aparecida Mendes

Abstract

Bariatric surgery, especially Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, can cause serious nutritional complications arising from poor absorption of essential nutrients. Secondary hyperparathyroidism is one such complications that leads to increased parathyroid hormone levels due to a decrease in calcium and vitamin D, which may compromise bone health. To compare calcium carbonate and calcium citrate in the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism. Patients were selected on the basis of their abnormal biochemical test and treatment was randomly done with citrate or calcium carbonate. After 60 days of supplementation, biochemical tests were repeated, showing improvement in both groups. Supplementation with calcium (citrate or carbonate) and vitamin D is recommended after surgery for prevention of secondary hyperparathyroidism.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 76 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Researcher 8 11%
Lecturer 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Student > Master 4 5%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 34 45%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 34 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 28 February 2023.
All research outputs
#8,402,160
of 29,376,261 outputs
Outputs from ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)
#44
of 315 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,955
of 374,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ABCD. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cirurgia Digestiva (São Paulo)
#8
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,376,261 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 315 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 374,243 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.