↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Immunonutrition as an adjuvant therapy for burns

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
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 (88th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
265 Mendeley
Title
Immunonutrition as an adjuvant therapy for burns
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007174.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah B Tan, Stefan Danilla, Alexandra Murray, Ramón Serra, Regina El Dib, Tom OW Henderson, Jason Wasiak

Abstract

With burn injuries involving a large total body surface area (TBSA), the body can enter a state of breakdown, resulting in a condition similar to that seen with severe lack of proper nutrition. In addition, destruction of the effective skin barrier leads to loss of normal body temperature regulation and increased risk of infection and fluid loss. Nutritional support is common in the management of severe burn injury, and the approach of altering immune system activity with specific nutrients is termed immunonutrition. Three potential targets have been identified for immunonutrition: mucosal barrier function, cellular defence and local or systemic inflammation. The nutrients most often used for immunonutrition are glutamine, arginine, branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs), omega-3 (n-3) fatty acids and nucleotides.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 265 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 263 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 64 24%
Student > Bachelor 47 18%
Researcher 28 11%
Student > Postgraduate 23 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 8%
Other 38 14%
Unknown 45 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 99 37%
Nursing and Health Professions 45 17%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 9 3%
Psychology 8 3%
Other 30 11%
Unknown 65 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 20 January 2015.
All research outputs
#2,072,273
of 17,925,806 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,716
of 11,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,338
of 315,496 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#119
of 249 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,925,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 315,496 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 249 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.