| Title |
Immunonutrition as an adjuvant therapy for burns
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007174.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hannah B Tan, Stefan Danilla, Alexandra Murray, Ramón Serra, Regina El Dib, Tom OW Henderson, Jason Wasiak |
| Abstract |
With burn injuries involving a large total body surface area (TBSA), the body can enter a state of breakdown, resulting in a condition similar to that seen with severe lack of proper nutrition. In addition, destruction of the effective skin barrier leads to loss of normal body temperature regulation and increased risk of infection and fluid loss. Nutritional support is common in the management of severe burn injury, and the approach of altering immune system activity with specific nutrients is termed immunonutrition. Three potential targets have been identified for immunonutrition: mucosal barrier function, cellular defence and local or systemic inflammation. The nutrients most often used for immunonutrition are glutamine, arginine, branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs), omega-3 (n-3) fatty acids and nucleotides. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 8% |
| Australia | 2 | 8% |
| Sweden | 1 | 4% |
| Canada | 1 | 4% |
| Turkey | 1 | 4% |
| India | 1 | 4% |
| Mexico | 1 | 4% |
| France | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 16 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 29% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 347 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 345 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 67 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 58 | 17% |
| Researcher | 32 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 25 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 7% |
| Other | 47 | 14% |
| Unknown | 94 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 114 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 48 | 14% |
| Psychology | 10 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 3% |
| Other | 37 | 11% |
| Unknown | 120 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 08 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,415,755
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,889
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,957
of 359,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#110
of 249 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 359,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 249 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 55% of its contemporaries.