↓ Skip to main content

Zinc supplementation for the treatment of measles in children

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2017
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 (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
28 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 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
Zinc supplementation for the treatment of measles in children
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd011177.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ajibola A Awotiwon, Olabisi Oduwole, Anju Sinha, Charles I Okwundu

Abstract

Measles is an important cause of childhood morbidity and mortality globally, despite increasing vaccine coverage. Zinc plays a significant role in the maintenance of normal immunological functions, therefore supplements given to zinc-deficient children will increase the availability of zinc and could reduce measles-related morbidity and mortality. This is an update of a review first published in 2015. To assess the effects of zinc supplementation in reducing morbidity and mortality in children with measles. We searched CENTRAL (03 February 2017, Issue 2), MEDLINE (1946 to 03 February 2017), Embase (1974 to 03 February 2017), CINAHL (1981 to 03 February 2017), LILACS (1982 to 03 February 2017), Web of Science (1985 to 03 February 2017), and BIOSIS Previews (1985 to 27 June 2014). We also searched ClinicalTrials.gov, the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 03 February 2017 to identify unpublished and ongoing studies. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effects of zinc in reducing morbidity and mortality in children with measles. Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion and extracted data on outcomes, details of the interventions, and other study characteristics using a standardised data extraction form. We used risk ratio (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) as measures of effect with 95% confidence intervals (CI). We included only one study, and did not conduct meta-analysis. We did not identify any new studies for inclusion in this update. One RCT met our inclusion criteria. The study was conducted in India and included 85 children diagnosed with measles and pneumonia. The trial showed no significant difference in mortality between children with measles and pneumonia who received zinc supplements and those who received placebo (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.14). There was no significant difference in time to absence of fever between children who received zinc supplements and those who did not (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.74). No treatment-related side effects were reported in either group. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence as very low. We could not draw any definitive conclusions from this review about the effects of zinc supplementation on clinical outcomes of children with measles due to the very low quality of the evidence available. There is insufficient evidence to confirm or refute the effect of zinc supplementation in children with measles.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 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 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 3 60%
Student > Bachelor 2 40%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 3 60%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 40%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 07 August 2018.
All research outputs
#812,115
of 13,537,601 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,569
of 10,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,798
of 266,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#101
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,537,601 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,635 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 266,710 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 255 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 60% of its contemporaries.