↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Gastrointestinal morphological alterations in obese rats kept under hypercaloric diets

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of General Medicine, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Gastrointestinal morphological alterations in obese rats kept under hypercaloric diets
Published in
International Journal of General Medicine, June 2013
DOI 10.2147/ijgm.s35482
Pubmed ID
Authors

Roberta Paresque, Nascimento, Mabel, Queiroz

Abstract

Hypercaloric diets have been successfully used as experimental models of obesity. This work compared morphological characteristics of inferior gastrointestinal organs. The experiment lasted 10 weeks, during which the rats' food consumption, body weight, distance between the mouth and neck, distance between mouth and neck, distance between neck and tail, and abdominal circumference were evaluated weekly. After the sacrifice of the rats, 20 variables referring to inferior gastrointestinal morphology were assessed. The results comprised descriptive statistics of the data, analysis of main components, linear correlation, and t-tests. Significant differences were found between the two groups for the variables of abdominal circumference, retroperitoneal fat, ratio between retroperitoneal fat/animal weight, stomach weight, ratio between animal weight/intestine weight and mesentery/animal weight, length of small intestine, length of large intestine, and lateral line of the cecum. The data allow us to state that a hypercaloric diet can be responsible an increase in fat in the abdominal cavity as well as gastrointestinal morphological alterations, principally in stomach development.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Student > Master 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Professor 2 11%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Sports and Recreations 2 11%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 3 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 July 2013.
All research outputs
#2,924,249
of 4,507,280 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of General Medicine
#157
of 273 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,304
of 89,492 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of General Medicine
#20
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,280 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 273 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 89,492 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.