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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Fish oil and treatment of cancer cachexia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genes & Nutrition, March 2008
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12263-008-0078-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Attilio Giacosa, Mariangela Rondanelli |
| Abstract |
Cancer cachexia is a syndrome characterized by high prevalence and multifactorial etiology. The pathophysiology of cancer-induced weight loss is mainly due to failure of food intake and to various metabolic abnormalities, including hypermetabolism. Multiple biologic pathways are involved in this process, including pro-inflammatory cytokines, neuroendocrine hormones and tumour specific factors such as proteolysis inducing factor (PIF). As a result, a protein and energy depletion is observed that is greater than what would be expected based on the simple decrease of food intake and is associated with marked reduction of lean body mass (LBM). Therapy requires a multi-model approach with control of reduced food intake and of the metabolic abnormalities. Combination treatment with nutritional support and modulation of metabolic/inflammation changes is promising. In this regard, n-3 fatty acids in dose of at least 1.5 g/day for a prolonged time to advanced cancer patients with weight loss, are associated with an improvement of clinical, biological and functional parameters and with amelioration of quality of life. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 15% |
| Researcher | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 15 | 19% |
| Unknown | 14 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 9 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 22 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 28 December 2021.
All research outputs
#3,664,076
of 22,774,233 outputs
Outputs from Genes & Nutrition
#72
of 388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,507
of 80,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genes & Nutrition
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,774,233 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 80,281 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them