You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Prevalence of Childhood Celiac Disease and Changes in Infant Feeding
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Pediatrics, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1542/peds.2012-1015 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Anneli Ivarsson, Anna Myléus, Fredrik Norström, Maria van der Pals, Anna Rosén, Lotta Högberg, Lars Danielsson, Britta Halvarsson, Solveig Hammarroth, Olle Hernell, Eva Karlsson, Lars Stenhammar, Charlotta Webb, Olof Sandström, Annelie Carlsson |
| Abstract |
Between 1984 and 1996, Sweden experienced an "epidemic" of clinical celiac disease in children <2 years of age, attributed partly to changes in infant feeding. Whether infant feeding affects disease occurrence and/or the clinical presentation remains unknown. We investigated and compared the total prevalence of celiac disease in 2 birth cohorts of 12-year-olds and related the findings to each cohort's ascertained infant feeding. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 6 | 18% |
| United States | 4 | 12% |
| Spain | 3 | 9% |
| Italy | 1 | 3% |
| Comoros | 1 | 3% |
| Canada | 1 | 3% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 15 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 27 | 82% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 18% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 3 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 181 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 33 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 15% |
| Researcher | 23 | 12% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 40 | 21% |
| Unknown | 37 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 74 | 39% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 16 | 9% |
| Unknown | 37 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 18 September 2014.
All research outputs
#815,719
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from Pediatrics
#2,742
of 17,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#5,446
of 206,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatrics
#40
of 281 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 49.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 206,851 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 97% 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 has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.