↓ Skip to main content

Eating Frequency, Food Intake, and Weight: A Systematic Review of Human and Animal Experimental Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Nutrition, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
88 X users
facebook
31 Facebook pages
video
5 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 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
Eating Frequency, Food Intake, and Weight: A Systematic Review of Human and Animal Experimental Studies
Published in
Frontiers in Nutrition, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnut.2015.00038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hollie A. Raynor, Matthew R. Goff, Seletha A. Poole, Guoxun Chen

Abstract

Eating frequently during the day, or "grazing," has been proposed to assist with managing food intake and weight. This systematic review assessed the effect of greater eating frequency (EF) on intake and anthropometrics in human and animal experimental studies. Studies were identified through the PubMed electronic database. To be included, studies needed to be conducted in controlled settings or use methods that carefully monitored food intake, and measure food intake or anthropometrics. Studies using human or animal models of disease states (i.e., conditions influencing glucose or lipid metabolism), aside from being overweight or obese, were not included. The 25 reviewed studies (15 human and 10 animal studies) contained varying study designs, EF manipulations (1-24 eating occasions per day), lengths of experimentation (230 min to 28 weeks), and sample sizes (3-56 participants/animals per condition). Studies were organized into four categories for reporting results: (1) human studies conducted in laboratory/metabolic ward settings; (2) human studies conducted in field settings; (3) animal studies with experimental periods <1 month; and (4) animal studies with experimental periods >1 month. Out of the 13 studies reporting on consumption, 8 (61.5%) found no significant effect of EF. Seventeen studies reported on anthropometrics, with 11 studies (64.7%) finding no significant effect of EF. Future, adequately powered, studies should examine if other factors (i.e., disease states, physical activity, energy balance and weight status, long-term increased EF) influence the relationship between increased EF and intake and/or anthropometrics.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 135 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 27 20%
Student > Master 20 15%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 27 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 36 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 38 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 106. 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 11 July 2022.
All research outputs
#399,128
of 25,517,918 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Nutrition
#188
of 6,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,507
of 394,877 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Nutrition
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,517,918 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. 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 394,877 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.