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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
From Cocoa to Chocolate: The Impact of Processing on In Vitro Antioxidant Activity and the Effects of Chocolate on Antioxidant Markers In Vivo
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in immunology, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01207 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carla D. Di Mattia, Giampiero Sacchetti, Dino Mastrocola, Mauro Serafini |
| Abstract |
Chocolate is a product processed from cocoa rich in flavonoids, antioxidant compounds, and bioactive ingredients that have been associated with both its healthy and sensory properties. Chocolate production consists of a multistep process which, starting from cocoa beans, involves fermentation, drying, roasting, nib grinding and refining, conching, and tempering. During cocoa processing, the naturally occurring antioxidants (flavonoids) are lost, while others, such as Maillard reaction products, are formed. The final content of antioxidant compounds and the antioxidant activity of chocolate is a function of several variables, some related to the raw material and others related to processing and formulation. The aim of this mini-review is to revise the literature on the impact of full processing on the in vitro antioxidant activity of chocolate, providing a critical analysis of the implications of processing on the evaluation of the antioxidant effect of chocolate in in vivo studies in humans. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 339 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 339 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 62 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 30 | 9% |
| Researcher | 22 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 50 | 15% |
| Unknown | 143 | 42% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 76 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 4% |
| Engineering | 12 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 12 | 4% |
| Other | 41 | 12% |
| Unknown | 164 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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
#1,272,029
of 25,872,466 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#1,128
of 32,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,186
of 332,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#19
of 525 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,872,466 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,522 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 332,581 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 525 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 96% of its contemporaries.