↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Protein supplementation of human milk for promoting growth in preterm infants

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
Title
Protein supplementation of human milk for promoting growth in preterm infants
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2000
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000433
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carl A Kuschel, Jane E Harding

Abstract

For term infants, human milk provides adequate nutrition to facilitate growth, as well as potential beneficial effects on immunity and the maternal-infant emotional state. However, the role of human milk in preterm infants is less well defined as it contains insufficient quantities of some nutrients to meet the estimated needs of the infant. Preterm infants require higher protein intakes than term infants to attain adequate growth rates, and have relatively higher protein turnover rates. Inadequate protein intakes may be partly responsible for low serum albumin and blood urea concentrations in preterm infants. The main objective was to determine if addition of protein to human milk leads to improved growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes without significant adverse effects in preterm infants. The standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group was used. This includes searches of the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, MEDLINE, previous reviews including cross references, abstracts, conferences and symposia proceedings, expert informants, and journal handsearching mainly in the English language. All trials utilizing random or quasi-random allocation to supplementation of human milk with protein or no supplementation in preterm infants who remained in hospital were eligible. Data were extracting using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by each author and synthesis of data using relative risk and weighted mean difference. Protein supplementation of human milk results in increases in short term weight gain (WMD 3.6 g/kg/day, 95% CI 2.4 to 4.8 g/kg/day), linear growth (WMD 0.28 cm/week, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38 cm/week) and head growth (WMD 0.15 cm/week, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.23 cm/week). There are insufficient data to evaluate long term neurodevelopmental and growth outcomes. There are too few infants studied to be certain that adverse effects of protein supplementation are not increased. Blood urea levels are increased (WMD 1.0 mmol/l, 95% CI 0.8 to 1.2 mmol/l). Protein supplementation of human milk in relatively well preterm infants results in increases in short term weight gain, linear and head growth. Urea levels are increased, which may reflect adequate rather than excessive dietary protein intake. Further research should be directed towards the evaluation of specific levels of protein intake in preterm infants and the clinical effects of supplementation with protein, including long term growth and neurodevelopmental outcomes. This may best be done in the context of refinement of available multicomponent fortifier preparations.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 24%
Student > Master 9 15%
Other 6 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 14 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 March 2008.
All research outputs
#3,266,719
of 16,429,373 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,054
of 11,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,815
of 370,437 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#154
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,429,373 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,491 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.3. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 370,437 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 218 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.