↓ Skip to main content

Randomised, double-blind, clinical investigation to compare orlistat 60 milligram and a customized polyglucosamine, two treatment methods for the management of overweight and obesity

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Randomised, double-blind, clinical investigation to compare orlistat 60 milligram and a customized polyglucosamine, two treatment methods for the management of overweight and obesity
Published in
BMC Obesity, January 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40608-016-0130-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manfred Stoll, Norman Bitterlich, Umberto Cornelli

Abstract

The efficacy of a non-prescription drug to support weight loss programs has yet to be compared. This clinical trial investigates the comparability of orlistat 60 milligram (mg) and polyglucosamine. Sixty-four overweight or obese subjects were included in a two-center double-blind study. One center was in Germany [center 1] and the other was in Italy [center 2]. The subjects (26 in center 1 and 38 in center 2) were recommended to follow a calorie deficit of about 2000 kilojoules/day and to increase their physical activity to 3 metabolic equivalent hours (MET h)/day. In both centers, subjects were randomized to receive polyglucosamine (2 tablets x 2) or orlistat (1 capsule x 3) for a period of 12 weeks. Weight loss was considered as a main variable together with the reduction of 5 per cent (%) of body weight (5R). Body Mass Index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC) were taken as secondary variables. A significant difference in weight loss between the two groups was shown, 6.7 ± 3.14 kilogram (kg) in group polyglucosamine versus 4.8 ± 2.24 kg in group orlistat (t test p < 0.05) respectively; BMI and WC reduction were also more consistent with polyglucosamine treatment than with orlistat treatment (t test p < 0.05). No significant difference was found in the number of subjects who achieved 5R (70% for polyglucosamine and 55% for orlistat group; chi square p > 0.05). The administration of polyglucosamine following energy restriction and increase in physical activity reduces body weight, BMI and WC more efficiently than orlistat. Even though both groups were instructed to adopt a calorie restricted diet together with increased physical activity an additional weight loss in the polyglucosamine group of 1.6 kilogram (kg) compared to the orlistat group (6.2 ± 3.46 versus 4.6 ± 2.36 kg) in both centers was seen despite the higher consumption of carbohydrates in Italy (center 2). A typical Italian diet is usually high in carbohydrate content whereas Germans tend to consume meals with higher fat content. This leads to the assumption that polyglucosamine limits both fat and carbohydrate absorption which would explain the comparable effective weight reduction in the Italian participants. Trial registration at ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02529631, registered on Aug 19, 2015 retrospectively registered.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Student > Postgraduate 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 11%
Psychology 2 7%
Linguistics 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 8 29%

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 22 January 2017.
All research outputs
#4,848,473
of 8,945,878 outputs
Outputs from BMC Obesity
#99
of 134 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,066
of 308,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Obesity
#10
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,945,878 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 134 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 308,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.