↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2013
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Delayed introduction of progressive enteral feeds to prevent necrotising enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001970.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Morgan J, Young L, McGuire W, Morgan, Jessie, Young, Lauren, McGuire, William

Abstract

The introduction of enteral feeds for very preterm (< 32 weeks) or very low birth weight (< 1500 g) infants is often delayed for several days or longer after birth due to concern that early introduction may not be tolerated and may increase the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC). However, delaying enteral feeding could diminish the functional adaptation of the gastrointestinal tract and prolong the need for parenteral nutrition with its attendant infectious and metabolic risks.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Other 4 10%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 10 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 49%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 12 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 07 August 2013.
All research outputs
#555,909
of 8,014,601 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,398
of 8,777 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,740
of 122,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#29
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,014,601 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,777 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 122,828 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 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.