↓ Skip to main content

Vitamin D and chronic diseases: the current state of the art

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Toxicology, July 2016
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 (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
115 Mendeley
Title
Vitamin D and chronic diseases: the current state of the art
Published in
Archives of Toxicology, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00204-016-1804-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giovanna Muscogiuri, Barbara Altieri, Cedric Annweiler, Giancarlo Balercia, H. B. Pal, Barbara J. Boucher, John J. Cannell, Carlo Foresta, Martin R. Grübler, Kalliopi Kotsa, Luca Mascitelli, Winfried März, Francesco Orio, Stefan Pilz, Giacomo Tirabassi, Annamaria Colao

Abstract

The objective was to provide the current state of the art regarding the role of vitamin D in chronic diseases (osteoporosis, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, dementia, autism, type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus, male and female fertility). The document was drawn up by panelists that provided their contribution according to their own scientific expertise. Each scientific expert supplied a first draft manuscript on a specific aspect of the document's topic that was subjected to voting by all experts as "yes" (agreement with the content and/or wording) or "no" (disagreement). The adopted rule was that statements supported by ≥75 % of votes would be immediately accepted, while those with <25 % would be rejected outright. Others would be subjected to further discussion and subsequent voting, where ≥67 % support or, in an eventual third round, a majority of ≥50 % would be needed. This document finds that the current evidence support a role for vitamin D in bone health but not in other health conditions. However, subjects with vitamin D deficiency have been found to be at high risk of developing chronic diseases. Therefore, although at the present time there is not sufficient evidence to recommend vitamin D supplementation as treatment of chronic diseases, the treatment of vitamin D deficiency should be desiderable in order to reduce the risk of developing chronic diseases.

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 115 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 114 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Unspecified 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Other 35 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 46 40%
Unspecified 15 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 6%
Other 24 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 04 August 2016.
All research outputs
#1,572,227
of 12,217,320 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Toxicology
#140
of 1,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,704
of 267,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Toxicology
#7
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,217,320 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,756 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 267,232 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.