↓ Skip to main content

Micronutrient supplementation for children with HIV infection

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 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
Micronutrient supplementation for children with HIV infection
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010666
Pubmed ID
Authors

James H Irlam, Nandi Siegfried, Marianne E Visser, Nigel C Rollins

Abstract

Micronutrient deficiencies are widespread and compound the effects of HIV disease in children, especially in poor communities. Micronutrient supplements may be effective and safe in reducing the burden of HIV disease. This review is an update of an earlier Cochrane review of micronutrient supplementation in children and adults which found that vitamin A and zinc are beneficial and safe in children exposed to HIV and living with HIV infection (Irlam 2010).

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.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 179 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 21%
Researcher 32 17%
Student > Bachelor 24 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 10%
Student > Postgraduate 12 6%
Other 39 21%
Unknown 20 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 81 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 12%
Social Sciences 14 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 3%
Other 19 10%
Unknown 30 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 25 February 2018.
All research outputs
#3,063,988
of 12,559,973 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,906
of 10,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,392
of 163,381 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#58
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,559,973 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.2. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 163,381 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.