↓ Skip to main content

Approach to a Child with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding

Overview of attention for article published in Indian Journal of Pediatrics, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
Title
Approach to a Child with Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding
Published in
Indian Journal of Pediatrics, March 2013
DOI 10.1007/s12098-013-0987-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sunit Singhi, Puneet Jain, M. Jayashree, Sadhna Lal

Abstract

Upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGIB) is a potentially life threatening medical emergency requiring an appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic approach. Therefore, the primary focus in a child with UGIB is resuscitation and stabilization followed by a diagnostic evaluation. The differential diagnosis of UGIB in children is determined by age and severity of bleed. In infants and toddlers mucosal bleed (gastritis and stress ulcers) is a common cause. In children above 2 y variceal bleeding due to Extra-Hepatic Portal Venous Obstruction (EHPVO) is the commonest cause of significant UGIB in developing countries as against peptic ulcer in the developed countries. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is the most accurate and useful diagnostic tool to evaluate UGIB in children. Parenteral vitamin K (infants, 1-2 mg/dose; children, 5-10 mg) and parenteral Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI's), should be administered empirically in case of a major UGIB. Octreotide infusion is useful in control of significant UGIB due to variceal hemorrhage. A temporarily placed, Sengstaken-Blakemore tube can be life saving if pharmacologic/ endoscopic methods fail to control variceal bleeding. Therapy in patients having mucosal bleed is directed at neutralization and/or prevention of gastric acid release; High dose Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPIs, Pantoprazole) are more efficacious than H2 receptor antagonists for this purpose.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 94 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 18 19%
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 13%
Student > Master 9 9%
Other 9 9%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 15 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 60%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Chemistry 3 3%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 21 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 March 2013.
All research outputs
#20,185,720
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Indian Journal of Pediatrics
#1,248
of 1,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,517
of 216,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indian Journal of Pediatrics
#16
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,517 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 216,179 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.