| Title |
Routine monitoring of gastric residual for prevention of necrotising enterocolitis in preterm infants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012937.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thangaraj Abiramalatha, Sivam Thanigainathan, Viraraghavan Vadakkencherry Ramaswamy, Balakrishnan Rajaiah, Srinivas Ramakrishnan |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 95 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 17 | 18% |
| United States | 17 | 18% |
| Australia | 5 | 5% |
| India | 3 | 3% |
| Ireland | 2 | 2% |
| Spain | 2 | 2% |
| Uganda | 2 | 2% |
| Saudi Arabia | 2 | 2% |
| Mexico | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 31 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 61 | 64% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 20 | 21% |
| Scientists | 12 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 24 | 42% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 11 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 24 | 42% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 11 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 72. 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 2023.
All research outputs
#576,646
of 24,878,531 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,063
of 12,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,087
of 340,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,878,531 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,993 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 340,469 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 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 93% of its contemporaries.