↓ Skip to main content

Impact of voluntary fortification and supplement use on dietary intakes and biomarker status of folate and vitamin B-12 in Irish adults

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2015
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 (86th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Impact of voluntary fortification and supplement use on dietary intakes and biomarker status of folate and vitamin B-12 in Irish adults
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 2015
DOI 10.3945/ajcn.115.107151
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sinéad M Hopkins, Michael J Gibney, Anne P Nugent, Helene McNulty, Anne M Molloy, John M Scott, Albert Flynn, JJ Strain, Mary Ward, Janette Walton, Breige A McNulty

Abstract

Ireland has traditionally operated a liberal policy of voluntary fortification, but little is known about how this practice, along with supplement use, affects population intakes and status of folate and vitamin B-12. The aim was to examine the relative impact of voluntary fortification and supplement use on dietary intakes and biomarker status of folate and vitamin B-12 in Irish adults. Folic acid and vitamin B-12 from fortified foods and supplements were estimated by using brand information for participants from the cross-sectional National Adult Nutrition Survey 2008-2010. Dietary and biomarker values were compared between 6 mutually exclusive consumption groups formed on the basis of folic acid intake. The consumption of folic acid through fortified foods at low, medium, and high levels of exposure [median (IQR) intakes of 22 (13, 32), 69 (56, 84), and 180 (137, 248) μg/d, respectively]; from supplements [203 (150, 400) μg/d]; or from both sources [287 (220, 438) μg/d] was associated with significantly higher folate intakes and status compared with nonconsumption of folic acid (18% of the population). Median (IQR) red blood cell (RBC) folate increased significantly from 699 (538, 934) nmol/L in nonconsumers to 1040 (83, 1390) nmol/L in consumers with a high intake of fortified foods (P < 0.001), with further nonsignificant increases in supplement users. Supplement use but not fortification was associated with significantly higher serum vitamin B-12 concentrations relative to nonconsumers (P < 0.001). Two-thirds of young women had suboptimal RBC folate for protection against neural tube defects (NTDs); among nonconsumers of folic acid, only 16% attained optimal RBC folate. The consumption of voluntarily fortified foods and/or supplement use was associated with significantly higher dietary intakes and biomarker status of folate in Irish adults. Of concern, the majority of young women remain suboptimally protected against NTDs.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 18%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 8 12%
Lecturer 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 10 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 15%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 14 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 02 June 2015.
All research outputs
#1,986,089
of 17,356,510 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#3,428
of 11,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,169
of 233,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#45
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,356,510 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,883 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 233,562 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.