↓ Skip to main content

Acute diarrhea: evidence-based management

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal de Pediatria, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#49 of 1,008)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
282 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Acute diarrhea: evidence-based management
Published in
Jornal de Pediatria, September 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.jped.2015.06.002
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To describe the current recommendations on the best management of pediatric patients with acute diarrheal disease. PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar. There has been little progress in the use of oral rehydration salts (ORS) in recent decades, despite being widely reported by international guidelines. Several studies have been performed to improve the effectiveness of ORS. Intravenous hydration with isotonic saline solution, quickly infused, should be given in cases of severe dehydration. Nutrition should be ensured after the dehydration resolution, and is essential for intestinal and immune health. Dietary restrictions are usually not beneficial and may be harmful. Symptomatic medications have limited indication and antibiotics are indicated in specific cases, such as cholera and moderate to severe shigellosis. Hydration and nutrition are the interventions with the greatest impact on the course of acute diarrhea.

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 282 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 %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 281 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 60 21%
Student > Master 34 12%
Student > Postgraduate 19 7%
Researcher 15 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 4%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 100 35%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 93 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 2%
Other 21 7%
Unknown 106 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 12 May 2025.
All research outputs
#2,578,871
of 28,583,110 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pediatria
#49
of 1,008 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,446
of 281,688 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pediatria
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,583,110 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,008 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 281,688 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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.