↓ Skip to main content

Performance enhancement with supplements: incongruence between rationale and practice

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, November 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
14 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
Performance enhancement with supplements: incongruence between rationale and practice
Published in
Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, November 2007
DOI 10.1186/1550-2783-4-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Petróczi, Declan P Naughton, Jason Mazanov, Allison Holloway, Jerry Bingham

Abstract

Athletes are expected to consider multiple factors when making informed decision about nutritional supplement use. Besides rules, regulations and potential health hazards, the efficacy of different nutritional supplements in performance enhancement is a key issue. The aim of this paper was to find evidence for informed decision making by investigating the relationship between specific performance-related reasons for supplement use and the reported use of nutritional supplements.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 1%
Norway 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
New Zealand 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Unknown 80 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 24%
Student > Master 16 19%
Student > Bachelor 16 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 4 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 22 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 8 9%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 14 April 2014.
All research outputs
#735,107
of 12,819,713 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#255
of 656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,298
of 179,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition
#15
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,819,713 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 656 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 45.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 179,571 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.