↓ Skip to main content

Differences in the interpretation of a modernized Mediterranean diet prescribed in intervention studies for the management of type 2 diabetes: how closely does this align with a traditional…

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Nutrition, 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 (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Differences in the interpretation of a modernized Mediterranean diet prescribed in intervention studies for the management of type 2 diabetes: how closely does this align with a traditional Mediterranean diet?
Published in
European Journal of Nutrition, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00394-018-1757-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anthony Villani, Jacinta Sultana, Justin Doecke, Evangeline Mantzioris

Abstract

Adherence to Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) is associated with the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, in intervention studies, there is discordance in the interpretation of a MedDiet. The purpose of this paper was to examine, synthesize, and develop a narrative review, exploring the qualitative differences in the interpretation of a modernized MedDiet prescribed as an intervention in clinical trials for the management of T2DM, and how closely this aligns with a traditional MedDiet. The 'traditional' MedDiet is often described as a dietary pattern high in unprocessed plant foods (fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, wholegrain cereals, and olive oil); moderate consumption of wine; low moderate in fish/shellfish; and an infrequent consumption of red meat, animal fats, vegetable oils, and processed foods. Synthesis of the reviewed literature demonstrates considerable variation in the qualitative interpretation of a MedDiet. We also identified inadequate reporting of MedDiet interventions, despite a number of studies referring to their intervention as a 'traditional' MedDiet. The majority of studies emphasized the same key dietary components and principles: an increased intake of vegetables, wholegrains, and the preferential consumption of white meat in substitute of red and processed meat and abundant use of olive oil. However, the reporting of specific dietary recommendations for fruit, legumes, nuts, bread, red wine, and fermentable dairy products were less consistent or not reported. Irrespective of the discordance in the interpretation of a MedDiet, a number of studies included in the present review reported improved glycaemic control and favorable cardiovascular outcomes with adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet. Nevertheless, greater clarity and depth of reporting amongst intervention studies is warranted for the refinement of a modernized MedDiet definition that is distinct from a prudent dietary pattern.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 10 36%
Student > Bachelor 5 18%
Other 4 14%
Student > Master 3 11%
Researcher 3 11%
Other 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 11 39%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 11%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 0 0%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 27 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,132,043
of 12,988,515 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nutrition
#540
of 1,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,137
of 269,111 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nutrition
#41
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,988,515 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 269,111 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 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 54% of its contemporaries.