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 |
Early enteral nutrition within 24h of colorectal surgery versus later commencement of feeding for postoperative complications
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004080.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Henning Keinke Andersen, Stephen J Lewis, Steve Thomas |
| Abstract |
The role of early postoperative enteral nutrition after gastrointestinal surgery is controversial. Traditional management consist of 'nil by mouth', where patients receive fluids followed by solids when tolerated. Although several trials have implicated lower incidence of septic complications and faster wound healing upon early enteral feeding, other trials have shown opposite results. The immediate advantage of caloric intake could be a faster recovery with fewer complications, to be evaluated systematically. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 279 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Faroe Islands | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Rwanda | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 267 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 38 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 35 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 32 | 11% |
| Other | 28 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 8% |
| Other | 63 | 23% |
| Unknown | 60 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 157 | 56% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 15 | 5% |
| Unknown | 72 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 September 2021.
All research outputs
#5,471,255
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,375
of 11,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,157
of 84,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#29
of 72 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 75th 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 84,801 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 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 51% of its contemporaries.