↓ Skip to main content

Coeliac disease and gluten avoidance in New Zealand children

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Disease in Childhood, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
Coeliac disease and gluten avoidance in New Zealand children
Published in
Archives of Disease in Childhood, November 2011
DOI 10.1136/archdischild-2011-300248
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Although gluten avoidance is thought to be common among New Zealanders, the prevalence of gluten avoidance and of actual coeliac disease (CD) in children is uncertain. Our aims were: (1) to determine the prevalence of doctor-diagnosed CD and of gluten avoidance in New Zealand children; and (2) among children without CD, to identify independent predictors of gluten avoidance.

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 8 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 81 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 %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
Unknown 79 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 23%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Student > Master 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 24 30%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 23 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 29 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 April 2016.
All research outputs
#6,773,915
of 34,394,092 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Disease in Childhood
#2,932
of 9,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,600
of 194,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Disease in Childhood
#10
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,394,092 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,616 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 194,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 76% of its contemporaries.