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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Energy and nutrient intakes of Sri Lankan patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional survey
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-015-1732-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arjuna Medagama, Devaka Fernando, Heshan Widanapathirana |
| Abstract |
Sri Lanka has a high prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Energy and macronutrient intakes of diabetic patients have not been previously studied in this population. We aimed to clarify the energy and nutrient intakes among a group of type 2 diabetic patients attending a tertiary care diabetes facility in Sri Lanka. Nutritional and energy intake of 123 randomly selected patients with type 2 diabetes, aged 30-74 years was assessed using a 24-h dietary recall. The mean energy intake for all participants was 1438 (SD 412) Kcal/day. The mean proportions of total carbohydrate, protein and fat comprising total energy intake were 68.1, 11.5 and 20.2 % respectively. The mean carbohydrate intake of 249.7 g/day comprised 50 % of rice. The mean daily protein, fat and dietary fibre intake was 42.5, 33 and 18.1 g respectively with a major contribution from plant sources. There was no significant difference in energy and nutrient intakes among the male and female participants. The present study provides the first pilot data on the energy and macronutrient intakes of diabetes patients in Sri Lanka. We clarified that these patients consumed an energy restricted, high-carbohydrate low fat diet compared to western diabetic patients. A larger nationwide dietary survey is recommended to confirm our findings. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 20% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 22 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 20% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 22 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 04 November 2019.
All research outputs
#7,535,755
of 22,992,311 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,250
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,398
of 389,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#42
of 148 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,992,311 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 389,590 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 148 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 69% of its contemporaries.