↓ Skip to main content

Enteral nutritional therapy for induction of remission in Crohn's disease

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
405 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
251 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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.
Title
Enteral nutritional therapy for induction of remission in Crohn's disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2007
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000542.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary Zachos, Melody Tondeur, Anne Marie Griffiths

Abstract

The role of enteral nutrition in Crohn's disease is controversial. Increasing research on the mechanisms by which nutritional therapy improves the clinical well being of patients with Crohn's disease has led to novel formula design and trials comparing two different forms of enteral nutrition. This meta-analysis aims to provide an update on the existing effectiveness data for both corticosteroids versus enteral nutrition and for one form of enteral nutrition versus another for inducing remission of active Crohn's 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 251 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 2%
United States 3 1%
Norway 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 241 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 16%
Researcher 38 15%
Student > Bachelor 31 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 10%
Other 21 8%
Other 57 23%
Unknown 40 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 108 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 4%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 47 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 05 August 2018.
All research outputs
#5,189,339
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,107
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,172
of 173,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#29
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,842 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.9. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 173,990 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.