| Title |
Effectiveness of nutrition training of health workers toward improving caregivers’ feeding practices for children aged six months to two years: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2891-12-66 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bruno F Sunguya, Krishna C Poudel, Linda B Mlunde, Prakash Shakya, David P Urassa, Masamine Jimba, Junko Yasuoka |
| Abstract |
Nutrition training of health workers can help to reduce child undernutrition. Specifically, trained health workers might contribute to this end through frequent nutrition counseling of caregivers. This may improve child-feeding practices and thus reduce the risk of undernutrition among children of counseled caregivers. Although studies have shown varied impacts of health workers' nutrition training on child feeding practices, no systematic review of the effectiveness of such intervention has yet been reported. Therefore, we conducted this study to examine the effectiveness of nutrition training for health workers on child feeding practices including feeding frequency, energy intake, and dietary diversity among children aged six months to two years. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 40% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 315 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Botswana | 1 | <1% |
| Ghana | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Rwanda | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Philippines | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 308 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 73 | 23% |
| Researcher | 35 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 34 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 9% |
| Other | 15 | 5% |
| Other | 60 | 19% |
| Unknown | 69 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 79 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 60 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 4% |
| Psychology | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 48 | 15% |
| Unknown | 81 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 01 November 2021.
All research outputs
#3,333,015
of 24,244,537 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#654
of 1,466 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,101
of 199,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#30
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,244,537 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,466 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 199,001 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.