↓ Skip to main content

Early versus Delayed Refeeding for Children with Acute Diarrhoea

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2011
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 (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
97 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Early versus Delayed Refeeding for Children with Acute Diarrhoea
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007296.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Germana V Gregorio, Leonila F Dans, Maria Asuncion Silvestre

Abstract

Acute diarrhoea is one of the principal causes of morbidity and mortality among children in low-income countries.  The cornerstone of treatment is oral rehydration therapy and dietary management.  However, there is a lack of data and studies on both the timing and type of feeding that should be adopted during the course of the illness.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 97 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 1%
Unknown 96 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 17 18%
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 7 7%
Other 18 19%
Unknown 16 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 40%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 11%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 8 8%
Unknown 27 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 04 June 2020.
All research outputs
#3,814,278
of 15,772,349 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,262
of 11,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,104
of 92,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,772,349 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 11,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. 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 92,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.