↓ Skip to main content

Vitamin A supplementation for the prevention of morbidity and mortality in infants one to six months of age

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
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 (85th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
15 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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.
Title
Vitamin A supplementation for the prevention of morbidity and mortality in infants one to six months of age
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007480.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aamer Imdad, Zunirah Ahmed, Zulfiqar A Bhutta, Imdad, Aamer, Ahmed, Zunirah, Bhutta, Zulfiqar A

Abstract

Vitamin A deficiency is a significant public health problem in low- and middle-income countries. Vitamin A supplementation provided to infants less than six months of age is one of the strategies to improve the nutrition of infants at high risk of vitamin A deficiency and thus potentially reduce their mortality and morbidity. To evaluate the effect of synthetic vitamin A supplementation in infants one to six months of age in low- and middle-income countries, irrespective of maternal antenatal or postnatal vitamin A supplementation status, on mortality, morbidity and adverse effects. We used the standard search strategy of Cochrane Neonatal to search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2016, Issue 2), MEDLINE via PubMed (1966 to 5 March 2016), Embase (1980 to 5 March 2016) and CINAHL (1982 to 5 March 2016). We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings and the reference lists of retrieved articles for randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials. Randomised or quasi-randomised, individually or cluster randomised trials involving synthetic vitamin A supplementation compared to placebo or no intervention provided to infants one to six months of age were eligible. Two review authors assessed the studies for eligibility and assessed their risk of bias and collected data on outcomes. The review included 12 studies (reported in 22 publications). The included studies assigned 24,846 participants aged one to six months to vitamin A supplementation or control group. There was no effect of vitamin A supplementation for the primary outcome of all-cause mortality based on seven studies that included 21,339 (85%) participants (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.25; I(2) = 0%; test for heterogeneity: P = 0.79; quality of evidence: moderate). Also, there was no effect of vitamin A supplementation on mortality or morbidity due to diarrhoea and respiratory tract infection. There was an increased risk of bulging fontanelle within 24 to 72 hours of supplementation in the vitamin A group compared to control (RR 3.10, 95% CI 1.89 to 5.09; I(2) = 9%, test for heterogeneity: P = 0.36; quality of evidence: high). There was no reported subsequent increased risk of death, convulsions or irritability in infants who developed bulging fontanelle after vitamin A supplementation, and it resolved in most cases within 72 hours. There was no increased risk of other adverse effects such as vomiting, irritability, diarrhoea, fever and convulsions in the vitamin A supplementation group compared to control. Vitamin A supplementation did not have any statistically significant effect on vitamin A deficiency (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.06; I(2) = 27%; test for heterogeneity: P = 0.25; quality of evidence: moderate). There is no convincing evidence that vitamin A supplementation for infants one to six months of age results in a reduction in infant mortality or morbidity in low- and middle-income countries. There is an increased risk of bulging fontanelle with vitamin A supplementation in this age group; however, there were no reported subsequent complications because of this adverse effect.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 3%
Unknown 29 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 27%
Student > Bachelor 5 17%
Researcher 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Other 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 70%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 13%
Unspecified 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 2 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 29 December 2016.
All research outputs
#998,643
of 11,311,336 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,384
of 9,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,142
of 259,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#80
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,311,336 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. 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 259,245 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.