↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Advantages of dietary, exercise-related, and therapeutic interventions to prevent and treat sarcopenia in adult patients: an update

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, September 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
333 Mendeley
Title
Advantages of dietary, exercise-related, and therapeutic interventions to prevent and treat sarcopenia in adult patients: an update
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, September 2010
DOI 10.2147/cia.s6920
Pubmed ID
Authors

DL Waters, RN Baumgartner, PJ Garry, B Vellas

Abstract

Sarcopenia is the loss of skeletal muscle mass and function with aging. Although the term sarcopenia was first coined in 1989, its etiology is still poorly understood. Moreover, a consensus for defining sarcopenia continues to elude us. Sarcopenic changes in the muscle include losses in muscle fiber quantity and quality, alpha-motor neurons, protein synthesis rates, and anabolic and sex hormone production. Other factors include basal metabolic rate, increased protein dietary requirements, and chronic inflammation secondary to age-related changes in cytokines and oxidative stress. These changes lead to decreased overall physical functioning, increased frailty, falls risk, and ultimately the loss of independent living. Because the intertwining relationships of these factors are complex, effective treatment options are still under investigation. The published data on sarcopenia are vast, and this review is not intended to be exhaustive. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the current knowledge of the definition, etiology, consequences, and current clinical trials that may help address this pressing public health problem for our aging populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 333 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 318 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 61 18%
Student > Bachelor 44 13%
Researcher 42 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 10%
Other 19 6%
Other 71 21%
Unknown 63 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 100 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 11%
Sports and Recreations 33 10%
Social Sciences 11 3%
Other 41 12%
Unknown 73 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 2023.
All research outputs
#2,695,477
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#283
of 1,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,323
of 103,821 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,968 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 103,821 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.