↓ Skip to main content

Prospective Study of Breakfast Eating and Incident Coronary Heart Disease in a Cohort of Male US Health Professionals.

Overview of attention for article published in Circulation, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#9 of 10,347)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
68 news outlets
blogs
10 blogs
twitter
830 tweeters
facebook
76 Facebook pages
googleplus
9 Google+ users
video
1 video uploader

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Prospective Study of Breakfast Eating and Incident Coronary Heart Disease in a Cohort of Male US Health Professionals.
Published in
Circulation, January 2013
DOI 10.1161/circulationaha.113.001474
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leah E. Cahill, Stephanie E. Chiuve, Rania A. Mekary, Majken K. Jensen, Alan J. Flint, Frank B. Hu, Eric B. Rimm, Cahill LE, Chiuve SE, Mekary RA, Jensen MK, Flint AJ, Hu FB, Rimm EB, Leah E Cahill, Stephanie E Chiuve, Rania A Mekary, Majken K Jensen, Alan J Flint, Frank B Hu, Eric B Rimm, L. E. Cahill, S. E. Chiuve, R. A. Mekary, M. K. Jensen, A. J. Flint, F. B. Hu, E. B. Rimm

Abstract

Among adults, skipping meals is associated with excess body weight, hypertension, insulin resistance, and elevated fasting lipid concentrations. However, it remains unknown whether specific eating habits regardless of dietary composition influence coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. The objective of this study was to prospectively examine eating habits and risk of CHD.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 830 tweeters 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Spain 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 115 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 17%
Student > Bachelor 20 16%
Researcher 20 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 15%
Student > Postgraduate 10 8%
Other 36 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 12%
Psychology 10 8%
Social Sciences 8 6%
Other 26 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1358. 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 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#1,167
of 9,717,007 outputs
Outputs from Circulation
#9
of 10,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11
of 133,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Circulation
#1
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,717,007 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,347 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 133,185 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 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 98% of its contemporaries.