↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional evaluation of children with chronic cholestatic disease

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal de Pediatria, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
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
Nutritional evaluation of children with chronic cholestatic disease
Published in
Jornal de Pediatria, November 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.jped.2015.07.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francislaine Veiga da Silva, Priscila Menezes Ferri, Thaís Costa Nascentes Queiroz, Pamela de Souza Haueisen Barbosa, Maria Cristina Cassiano de Oliveira, Laura Jácome de Melo Pereira, Ana Cristina Simões e Silva, Francisco José Penna, Eleonora Druve Tavares Fagundes, Alexandre Rodrigues Ferreira

Abstract

To evaluate the nutritional status of children with persistent cholestasis and to compare the anthropometric indices between children with and without liver cirrhosis and children with and without jaundice. Children with persistent cholestasis, i.e. increased direct bilirrubin or changes in the canalicular enzyme gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), were included. The anthropometric measures were weight (W), height or length (H), arm circumference (AC), triceps skinfold thickness (TST), arm muscle circumference (AMC), and body mass index (BMI). Ninety-one children with cholestasis, with current median age of 12 months, were evaluated. W/age (A) and H/A indices below -2 Z-scores were observed in 33% and 30.8% of patients, respectively. Concerning the W/H index and BMI, only 12% and 16% of patients, respectively, were below -2 Z-scores. Regarding AC, 43.8% of 89 evaluated patients had some depletion. Observing the TST, 64% of patients had depletion, and 71.1% of the 45 evaluated patients had some degree of depletion regarding the ACM index. Evaluation using weight in patients with chronic liver diseases may overestimate the nutritional status due to visceromegaly, subclinical edema, or ascites. Indices that correlate weight and height, such as W/H and BMI, may also not show depletion because of the chronic condition in which there are depletion of both weight and height. TST, AC, and ACM are parameters that better estimate nutritional status and should be part of the management of patients with liver diseases and cholestasis.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 48 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 20 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 16%
Psychology 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 23 47%
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 04 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pediatria
#644
of 896 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,026
of 393,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pediatria
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 896 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 393,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.