↓ Skip to main content

Quality protein intake is inversely related with abdominal fat

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition & Metabolism, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#20 of 743)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
10 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
88 tweeters
facebook
22 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users
video
12 video uploaders

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 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
Quality protein intake is inversely related with abdominal fat
Published in
Nutrition & Metabolism, January 2012
DOI 10.1186/1743-7075-9-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jeremy P Loenneke, Jacob M Wilson, Anssi H Manninen, Mandy E Wray, Jeremy T Barnes, Thomas J Pujol

Abstract

Dietary protein intake and specifically the quality of the protein in the diet has become an area of recent interest. This study determined the relationship between the amount of quality protein, carbohydrate, and dietary fat consumed and the amount of times the ~10 g essential amino acid (EAA) threshold was reached at a meal, with percent central abdominal fat (CAF). Quality protein was defined as the ratio of EAA to total dietary protein. Quality protein consumed in a 24-hour period and the amount of times reaching the EAA threshold per day was inversely related to percent CAF, but not for carbohydrate or dietary fat. In conclusion, moderate to strong correlations between variables indicate that quality and distribution of protein may play an important role in regulating CAF, which is a strong independent marker for disease and mortality.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Netherlands 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 57 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 21%
Student > Bachelor 13 21%
Student > Master 11 18%
Other 8 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 7 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 14 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 10 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 169. 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 24 February 2020.
All research outputs
#103,143
of 15,124,181 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition & Metabolism
#20
of 743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#766
of 216,797 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition & Metabolism
#2
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,124,181 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 216,797 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.