↓ Skip to main content

Review: Is rapid fat accumulation in early life associated with adverse later health outcomes?

Overview of attention for article published in Placenta, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
60 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
Review: Is rapid fat accumulation in early life associated with adverse later health outcomes?
Published in
Placenta, January 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.placenta.2017.01.101
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abirami Ratnasingham, Yvonne A. Eiby, Marloes Dekker Nitert, Timothy Donovan, Barbara E. Lingwood

Abstract

This review discusses ways in which the maternal environment and placental function affect the birth weight and adult health outcomes of offspring. These maternal and placental factors have varying and sometimes opposing effects on birth weight, resulting in infants that are born small for gestational age (SGA), large for gestational age (LGA) or preterm. However, all these alterations in weight have similar effects on adult health, increasing the risk of obesity and its associated cardiovascular and metabolic disorders. While birth weight has been used as a marker for risk of adverse adult health, we propose that a common feature of all these scenarios - early accumulation of excess body fat - may be a better marker than birth weight alone. Furthermore, altered neonatal fat accumulation may be more closely related to the mechanism by which maternal environment and placental adaptation mediate effects on adult health. We suggest that more research should be focussed on early fat accretion, factors that promote fat accretion and if it can be avoided, and whether it would be beneficial to try to reduce fat accumulation in early life.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 6 10%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Arts and Humanities 2 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 21 35%
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 23 January 2017.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Placenta
#1,159
of 2,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,118
of 423,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Placenta
#23
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,026 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 423,602 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.