↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Body Position on Energy Expenditure of Preterm Infants as Determined by Simultaneous Direct and Indirect Calorimetry

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Perinatology, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
35 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.
Article details
Title
Effect of Body Position on Energy Expenditure of Preterm Infants as Determined by Simultaneous Direct and Indirect Calorimetry
Published in
American Journal of Perinatology, October 2016
DOI 10.1055/s-0036-1593476
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Background Indirect calorimetry is the standard method for estimating energy expenditure in clinical research. Few studies have evaluated indirect calorimetry in infants by comparing it with simultaneous direct calorimetry. Our purpose was (1) to compare the energy expenditure of preterm infants determined by these two methods, direct calorimetry and indirect calorimetry; and (2) to examine the effect of body position, supine or prone, on energy expenditure. Study Design We measured energy expenditure by simultaneous direct (heat loss by gradient-layer calorimeter corrected for heat storage) and indirect calorimetry (whole-body oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production) in 15 growing preterm infants during two consecutive interfeeding intervals, once in the supine position and once in the prone position. Results The mean energy expenditure for all measurements in both positions did not differ significantly by the method used: 2.82 (standard deviation [SD] 0.42) kcal/kg/h by direct calorimetry and 2.78 (SD 0.48) kcal/kg/h by indirect calorimetry. The energy expenditure was significantly lower, by 10%, in the prone than in the supine position, whether examined by direct calorimetry (2.67 vs. 2.97 kcal/kg/h, p < 0.001) or indirect calorimetry (2.64 vs. 2.92 kcal/kg/h, p = 0.017). Conclusion Direct calorimetry and indirect calorimetry gave similar estimates of energy expenditure. Energy expenditure was 10% lower in the prone position than in the supine position.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Other 3 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Other 8 23%
Unknown 11 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 17%
Neuroscience 3 9%
Computer Science 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 13 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 10 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,273,624
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Perinatology
#1,610
of 2,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,342
of 320,333 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Perinatology
#50
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 320,333 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 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.