↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Intake of glucosinolates and risk of coronary heart disease in three large prospective cohorts of US men and women

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epidemiology, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Intake of glucosinolates and risk of coronary heart disease in three large prospective cohorts of US men and women
Published in
Clinical Epidemiology, June 2018
DOI 10.2147/clep.s164497
Pubmed ID
Authors

Le Ma, Gang Liu, Geng Zong, Laura Sampson, Frank B Hu, Walter C Willett, Eric B Rimm, JoAnn E Manson, Kathryn M Rexrode, Qi Sun

Abstract

Glucosinolates, a group of phytochemicals abundant in cruciferous vegetables, may have cardioprotective properties. However, no prospective study has evaluated the association of intake of glucosinolates with the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). The objective of the study was to evaluate the association between the intake of glucosinolates and incident CHD in US men and women. Prospective longitudinal cohort study. Health professionals in the USA. We followed 74,241 women in the Nurses' Health Study (NHS; 1984-2012), 94,163 women in the NHSII (1991-2013), and 42,170 men in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986-2012), who were free of cardiovascular disease and cancer at baseline. Glucosinolate intake was assessed using validated semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaires at baseline and updated every 2-4 years during follow-up. Incident cases of CHD were confirmed by medical record review. During 4,824,001 person-years of follow-up, 8,010 cases of CHD were identified in the three cohorts. After adjustment for major lifestyle and dietary risk factors of CHD, weak but significantly positive associations were observed for glucosinolates with CHD risk when comparing the top with bottom quintiles (hazard ratio [HR]:1.09; 95% CI: 1.01, 1.17; Ptrend<0.001). Higher intakes of three major subtypes of glucosinolates were consistently associated with a higher CHD risk, although the association for indolylglucosinolate did not achieve statistical significance. Regarding cruciferous vegetable intake, participants who consumed one or more servings per week of Brussels sprouts (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.06, 1.26; P<0.001) and cabbage (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.17; P=0.009) had a significantly higher CHD risk than those who consumed these cruciferous vegetables less than once per month. In these three prospective cohort studies, dietary glucosinolate intake was associated with a slightly higher risk of CHD in US adults. These results warrant replications in further studies including biomarker-based studies. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and elucidate mechanistic pathways that may underlie these associations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 21%
Student > Master 4 11%
Librarian 2 5%
Unspecified 2 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 16 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Unspecified 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 18 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 August 2022.
All research outputs
#3,207,824
of 23,072,295 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#148
of 728 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,129
of 330,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#8
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,072,295 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 728 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 330,279 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.