↓ Skip to main content

History of vitamin E in infant nutrition

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, July 1987
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
History of vitamin E in infant nutrition
Published in
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, July 1987
DOI 10.1093/ajcn/46.1.183
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Vitamin E was discovered by Evans and Bishop in 1922. Work in the 1930s revealed the chemical structure and the biological function of alpha-tocopherol. In the 1940s Filer and others demonstrated that vitamin E protects tissue unsaturated fatty acids against oxidation. The 1940s and the 1950s marked the beginning of interest in the role of vitamin E in infant nutrition. During this period, investigators examined the intestinal absorption of vitamin E in infants and its use for the prevention of hemolysis, retrolental fibroplasia, intracranial hemorrhage, and pulmonary oxygen toxicity. These studies were the forerunners of more recent studies examining possible benefits of vitamin E therapy in premature infants. Recent studies confirmed earlier reports indicating that enteral administration of vitamin E is the safest and most effective route in infants. Although preventing vitamin E deficiency is clearly necessary, neither earlier nor more recent work has shown any benefit from high-dose vitamin E therapy (greater than 20 IU X kg-1 X d-1) for premature infants.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Student > Postgraduate 3 7%
Other 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 23 51%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 24 53%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 January 2022.
All research outputs
#4,164,575
of 33,982,974 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#5,618
of 15,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,126
of 16,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
#6
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,982,974 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,322 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 16,882 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.