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 |
Ethnic Differences in Bone Health
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in endocrinology, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fendo.2015.00024 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ayse Zengin, Ann Prentice, Kate Anna Ward |
| Abstract |
There are differences in bone health between ethnic groups in both men and in women. Variations in body size and composition are likely to contribute to reported differences. Most studies report ethnic differences in areal bone mineral density (aBMD), which do not consistently parallel ethnic patterns in fracture rates. This suggests that other parameters beside aBMD should be considered when determining fracture risk between and within populations, including other aspects of bone strength: bone structure and microarchitecture, as well as muscle strength (mass, force generation, anatomy) and fat mass. We review what is known about differences in bone-densitometry-derived outcomes between ethnic groups and the extent to which they account for the differences in fracture risk. Studies are included that were published primarily between 1994 and 2014. A "one size fits all approach" should definitely not be used to understand better ethnic differences in fracture risk. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 88 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Researcher | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 26 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 15% |
| Unknown | 32 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. 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 03 April 2024.
All research outputs
#663,921
of 25,795,662 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in endocrinology
#150
of 13,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,401
of 292,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in endocrinology
#1
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,795,662 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 292,908 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 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 98% of its contemporaries.