↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Nutritional screening for improving professional practice for patient outcomes in hospital and primary care settings

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
247 Mendeley
Title
Nutritional screening for improving professional practice for patient outcomes in hospital and primary care settings
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005539.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amir-Houshang Omidvari, Yasaman Vali, Susan M Murray, David Wonderling, Arash Rashidian

Abstract

Given the prevalence of under-nutrition and reports of inadequate nutritional management of patients in hospitals and the community, nutritional screening may play a role in reducing the risks of malnutrition. Screening programmes can invoke costs to health systems and patients. It is therefore important to assess the effectiveness of nutritional screening programmes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 247 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Unknown 240 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 48 19%
Researcher 32 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 11%
Student > Bachelor 23 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 40 16%
Unknown 65 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 45 18%
Social Sciences 18 7%
Psychology 10 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Other 19 8%
Unknown 81 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 September 2014.
All research outputs
#7,105,147
of 25,383,344 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,634
of 12,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,795
of 210,133 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#198
of 281 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,383,344 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,571 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 210,133 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 281 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.