↓ 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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
25 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
322 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 25 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 322 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 320 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 65 20%
Student > Bachelor 56 17%
Researcher 30 9%
Student > Postgraduate 24 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 7%
Other 58 18%
Unknown 67 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 103 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 15%
Unspecified 17 5%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Psychology 9 3%
Other 44 14%
Unknown 92 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 08 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,994,743
of 21,841,508 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,421
of 12,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,777
of 346,347 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#106
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,841,508 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,114 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 346,347 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 246 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 57% of its contemporaries.