↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of flax (Linum usitatissimum) and Salba-chia (Salvia hispanica L.) seeds on postprandial glycemia and satiety in healthy individuals: a randomized, controlled, crossover study

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
22 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
4 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
135 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of flax (Linum usitatissimum) and Salba-chia (Salvia hispanica L.) seeds on postprandial glycemia and satiety in healthy individuals: a randomized, controlled, crossover study
Published in
European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, December 2016
DOI 10.1038/ejcn.2016.148
Pubmed ID
Authors

V Vuksan, L Choleva, E Jovanovski, A L Jenkins, F Au-Yeung, A G Dias, H V T Ho, A Zurbau, L Duvnjak

Abstract

Flax and Salba-chia seeds have risen in popularity owing to their favorable nutrient composition, including a high fiber content. Despite having comparable nutritional profiles, preliminary observations suggest differences in gelling properties, an attribute that may alter the kinetics of food digestion. Thus, we compared the effect of two seeds on postprandial glycemia and satiety scores. Fifteen healthy participants (M/F: 5/10; age: 23.9±3 years; BMI: 22.2±0.8 kg/m(2)) were randomized to receive a 50 g glucose challenge, alone or supplemented with either 25 g ground Salba-chia or 31.5 g flax, on three separate occasions. Blood glucose samples and satiety ratings were collected at fasting and over 2-h postprandially. In addition, in vitro viscosity of the beverages was assessed utilizing standard rheological methodology. Both Salba-chia and flax reduced blood glucose area under the curve over 120 min by 82.5±19.7 mmol/l (P<0.001) and 60.0±19.7 mmol/l (P=0.014), respectively, relative to a glucose control. Salba-chia reduced peak glucose (-0.64±0.24 mmol/l; P=0.030) and increased time to peak (11.3±3.8 min; P=0.015) compared with flax. Salba-chia significantly reduced the mean ratings of desire to eat (-7±2 mm; P=0.005), prospective consumption (-7±2 mm; P=0.010) and overall appetite score (-6±2 mm; P=0.012), when compared with flax. The viscosity of Salba-chia, flax and control was 49.9, 2.5, and 0.002 Pa·s, respectively. Despite the similarities in nutritional composition, Salba-chia appears to have the ability to convert glucose into a slow-release carbohydrate and affect satiety to a greater extent than flax, possibly due to the higher fiber viscosity. Incorporation of either flax or Salba-chia into the diet may be beneficial, although use of Salba-chia may confer additional benefit.European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication, 21 December 2016; doi:10.1038/ejcn.2016.148.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Unknown 132 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 16%
Researcher 14 10%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 48 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 4%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 55 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 101. 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 14 May 2023.
All research outputs
#405,902
of 24,943,708 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#148
of 4,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,722
of 432,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#3
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,943,708 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,050 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. 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 432,406 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 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.