↓ Skip to main content

Probiotics and necrotizing enterocolitis

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Surgery International, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
Title
Probiotics and necrotizing enterocolitis
Published in
Pediatric Surgery International, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00383-015-3790-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paul Fleming, Nigel J. Hall, Simon Eaton

Abstract

Probiotics for the prevention of necrotizing enterocolitis have attracted a huge interest. Combined data from heterogeneous randomised controlled trials suggest that probiotics may decrease the incidence of NEC. However, the individual studies use a variety of probiotic products, and the group at greatest risk of NEC, i.e., those with a birth weight of less than 1000 g, is relatively under-represented in these trials so we do not have adequate evidence of either efficacy or safety to recommend universal prophylactic administration of probiotics to premature infants. These problems have polarized neonatologists, with some taking the view that it is unethical not to universally administer probiotics to premature infants, whereas others regard the meta-analyses as flawed and that there is insufficient evidence to recommend routine probiotic administration. Another problem is that the mechanism by which probiotics might act is not clear, although some experimental evidence is starting to accumulate. This may allow development of surrogate endpoints of effectiveness, refinement of probiotic regimes, or even development of pharmacological agents that may act through the same mechanism. Hence, although routine probiotic administration is controversial, studies of probiotic effects may ultimately lead us to effective means to prevent this devastating disease.

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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 4%
United States 2 3%
France 1 1%
Unknown 69 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Researcher 10 13%
Other 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Student > Master 7 9%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 8%
Engineering 3 4%
Other 7 9%
Unknown 15 20%
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 September 2015.
All research outputs
#20,292,660
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Surgery International
#939
of 1,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,190
of 274,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Surgery International
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 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 1,253 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. 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 274,256 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 30 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.