↓ Skip to main content

Ethical Issues in Infant Feeding After Disasters

Overview of attention for article published in Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, July 2012
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 (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Ethical Issues in Infant Feeding After Disasters
Published in
Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, July 2012
DOI 10.1177/1010539512453253
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In the aftermath of many disasters the silence is punctuated by the crying of infants, hungry infants. The aim of this paper is to discuss ethical issues in feeding infants after disasters. The Asia Pacific region generates 25% of the world's GDP, but experiences 45% of natural disasters and 42% of the economic losses due to disasters. The region has 61% of the world's population, but 86% of the population affected by disasters. Breastfeeding, exclusive to six months and continuing thereafter, is important for growth and the health of the infant in the short term and later in life. In most natural disasters, mothers and infants will both suffer, but in some disasters, such as earthquakes and building collapses, infants can survive in small spaces. Infants separated from mothers require a wet nurse (rarely available) or feeding with infant formula and sterile water. Formula companies often donate supplies of infant formula but distribution should follow ethical principles. Mothers who are injured or short of food can still continue breastfeeding and don't need formula. Where formula must be used, health workers need to follow the highest ethical standards to avoid promoting infant formula to vulnerable communities in the post recovery phase.

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 11 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 84 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 States 1 1%
Unknown 83 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 13%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Other 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 28 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 15%
Social Sciences 8 10%
Arts and Humanities 4 5%
Psychology 3 4%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 32 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 01 September 2024.
All research outputs
#3,458,545
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health
#58
of 894 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,731
of 213,652 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health
#3
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 894 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 213,652 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.