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.
Twitter Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Iron therapy for improving psychomotor development and cognitive function in children under the age of three with iron deficiency anaemia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd001444.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bo Wang, Siyan Zhan, Ting Gong, Liming Lee |
| Abstract |
Iron deficiency and iron deficiency anaemia (IDA) are common in young children. It has been suggested that the lack of iron may have deleterious effects on children's psychomotor development and cognitive function. To evaluate the benefits of iron therapy on psychomotor development and cognitive function in children with IDA, a Cochrane review was carried out in 2001. This is an update of that review. |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 301 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 299 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 51 | 17% |
| Researcher | 43 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 35 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 21 | 7% |
| Other | 59 | 20% |
| Unknown | 68 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 96 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 36 | 12% |
| Psychology | 24 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 30 | 10% |
| Unknown | 86 | 29% |
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 01 January 2016.
All research outputs
#4,429,509
of 22,711,645 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,773
of 12,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,376
of 197,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#159
of 290 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,645 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,313 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 197,653 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 290 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.