↓ Skip to main content

Neck circumference in adolescents and cardiometabolic risk: A sistematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Neck circumference in adolescents and cardiometabolic risk: A sistematic review
Published in
Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira, January 2018
DOI 10.1590/1806-9282.64.01.54
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aisha Aguiar Morais, Urjel Aguiar Bouissou Morais, Maria Marta Sarquis Soares, Márcia Christina Caetano Romano, Joel Alves Lamounier

Abstract

To critically analyze articles on the relation between neck circumference (NC) in adolescents and: body mass index, fat distribution, metabolic syndrome and its individual components, and cardiovascular risk. Systematic review undertaken by two independent researchers using the Pubmed/Medline, Lilacs/Medline, Scielo and Cochrane databases in English, Spanish and Portuguese in the period comprising the past 5 years. Eighteen (18) articles were selected. The articles show an association between NC in adolescents and body fat (BMI), central fat distribution (WC), metabolic syndrome and several of its individual components, and cardiovascular risk. Some values are proposed for NC cutoff points as a diagnostic tool for nutritional status, high blood pressure and pre-hypertension, cardiovascular risk, insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome. We identified a percentile curve constructed for Brazilian adolescents. There is a shortage of studies with representative samples, variety at the NC measurement sites, and the age of the participants, which makes it difficult to establish definitive landmarks.

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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 14 22%
Unknown 20 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 17%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 26 41%

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 March 2018.
All research outputs
#10,146,932
of 12,695,728 outputs
Outputs from Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
#273
of 460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,821
of 274,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,695,728 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 460 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 274,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.