| Title |
Consumption of soft drinks and juices and risk of liver and biliary tract cancers in a European cohort
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nutrition, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00394-014-0818-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Magdalena Stepien, Talita Duarte-Salles, Veronika Fedirko, Antonia Trichopoulou, Pagona Lagiou, Christina Bamia, Kim Overvad, Anne Tjønneland, Louise Hansen, Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault, Guy Fagherazzi, Gianluca Severi, Tilman Kühn, Rudolf Kaaks, Krasimira Aleksandrova, Heiner Boeing, Eleni Klinaki, Domenico Palli, Sara Grioni, Salvatore Panico, Rosario Tumino, Alessio Naccarati, H. Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita, Petra H. Peeters, Guri Skeie, Elisabete Weiderpass, Christine L. Parr, José Ramón Quirós, Genevieve Buckland, Esther Molina-Montes, Pilar Amiano, Maria-Dolores Chirlaque, Eva Ardanaz, Emily Sonestedt, Ulrika Ericson, Maria Wennberg, Lena Maria Nilsson, Kay-Tee Khaw, Nick Wareham, Kathryn E. Bradbury, Heather A. Ward, Isabelle Romieu, Mazda Jenab |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to assess associations between intake of combined soft drinks (sugar sweetened and artificially sweetened) and fruit and vegetable juices and the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), intrahepatic bile duct (IHBC) and biliary tract cancers (GBTC) using data from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort of 477,206 participants from 10 European countries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 14 | 23% |
| United States | 8 | 13% |
| United Kingdom | 4 | 7% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Canada | 2 | 3% |
| Italy | 2 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Belgium | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 34% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 46 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 16% |
| Scientists | 3 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 138 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 21 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 13% |
| Researcher | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 9% |
| Professor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 13% |
| Unknown | 47 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 51 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 362. 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 09 May 2024.
All research outputs
#90,445
of 25,877,363 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nutrition
#29
of 2,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#847
of 362,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nutrition
#1
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,877,363 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. 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 362,399 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 97% of its contemporaries.