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 |
A Comparison of Measurements of a Pediatric Supplement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Dysphagia, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00455-018-9931-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Taylor N. Creech, Michael Bailey-Van Kuren, Jessica Sparks, Samantha B. Becker, Rita S. N. Kou, Olivia C. Wnek, Donna R. Scarborough |
| Abstract |
This study evaluated the flow properties of viscosity and flow rate for water and two common pediatric liquids. The flow properties of the test liquids are of interest to create a cup simulation model and "smart" prototype training cup. Two objective methods of determining flow properties were utilized: a rheometer to assess viscosity and a modified version of the International Dysphagia Diet Standardization Initiative (IDDSI) to assess flow rate. Rheometer results concluded that the pediatric supplements were less than 50 cP at all shear rates evaluated and exhibited shear-thinning properties, placing both liquids into the "thin" category. The IDDSI, which was performed according to standardized protocol and also with experimental modifications of varying syringe volumes, determined that all three test liquids had greater than 1 mL/s flow rate across all syringe types/sizes. The experimental modification of the IDDSI with 60 mL syringe volume was found to be the most consistent and applicable with discrete values obtained across all liquids tested. A flow rate factor equation can be determined with the use of a 60 mL syringe, with our laboratory setup, to create the cup simulation model. This computer-generated cup simulation model also aims to integrate engineering with clinical practice to develop a "smart" prototype training cup equipped with software to control flow rate. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 States | 2 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 20% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 13% |
| Psychology | 1 | 7% |
| Engineering | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 7 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 April 2019.
All research outputs
#14,075,458
of 23,839,820 outputs
Outputs from Dysphagia
#939
of 1,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,241
of 332,580 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Dysphagia
#18
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,839,820 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,327 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 332,580 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.