↓ Skip to main content

Macronutrient Composition of the Diet and Prospective Weight Change in Participants of the EPIC-PANACEA Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
160 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.
Title
Macronutrient Composition of the Diet and Prospective Weight Change in Participants of the EPIC-PANACEA Study
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0057300
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne-Claire Vergnaud, Teresa Norat, Traci Mouw, Dora Romaguera, Anne M. May, H. Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita, Daphne van der A, Antonio Agudo, Nicholas Wareham, Kay-Tee Khaw, Isabelle Romieu, Heinz Freisling, Nadia Slimani, Florence Perquier, Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault, Françoise Clavel-Chapelon, Domenico Palli, Franco Berrino, Amalia Mattiello, Rosario Tumino, Fulvio Ricceri, Laudina Rodríguez, Esther Molina-Montes, Pilar Amiano, Aurelio Barricarte, Maria-Dolores Chirlaque, Francesca L. Crowe, Philippos Orfanos, Androniki Naska, Antonia Trichopoulou, Birgit Teucher, Rudolf Kaaks, Heiner Boeing, Brian Buijsse, Ingeged Johansson, Göran Hallmans, Isabel Drake, Emily Sonestedt, Marianne Uhre Jakobsen, Kim Overvad, Anne Tjønneland, Jytte Halkjær, Guri Skeie, Tonje Braaten, Eiliv Lund, Elio Riboli, Petra H. M. Peeters

Abstract

The effect of the macronutrient composition of the usual diet on long term weight maintenance remains controversial.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 160 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 159 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 27 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 11%
Student > Master 17 11%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Other 40 25%
Unknown 31 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 7%
Sports and Recreations 5 3%
Other 22 14%
Unknown 44 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 21 June 2021.
All research outputs
#1,107,795
of 24,167,226 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#14,493
of 207,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,144
of 198,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#330
of 5,401 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,167,226 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 207,779 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 198,105 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,401 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.