↓ Skip to main content

Epidemiological clues to preventing colic

Overview of attention for article published in Veterinary Journal, June 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
170 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
Epidemiological clues to preventing colic
Published in
Veterinary Journal, June 2005
DOI 10.1016/j.tvjl.2005.04.002
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Colic remains a significant problem in the horse in terms of welfare and economics; in some equine populations it is the single most common cause of death. Many causes of colic are cited in the equestrian and veterinary literature but little scientific evidence exists to substantiate these theories. Recent epidemiological investigations have confirmed that colic is complex and multi-factorial in nature. Studies have identified a number of factors that are associated with increased risk of colic including parasite burden, certain feed types, recent change in feeding practices, stabling, lack of access to pasture and water, increasing exercise and transport. These findings are reviewed together with examples of management practices that may be altered to reduce the incidence of specific types of colic. This is an opinionated, not a systematic, review focusing on those areas that are considered most relevant to the practitioner.

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.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 164 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 30 18%
Student > Master 23 14%
Student > Postgraduate 17 10%
Researcher 10 6%
Other 8 5%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 57 34%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 52 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 39 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 9%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 54 32%
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 06 June 2012.
All research outputs
#28,603,920
of 34,363,559 outputs
Outputs from Veterinary Journal
#1,817
of 2,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,861
of 97,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Veterinary Journal
#18
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,363,559 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. 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 97,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.