↓ Skip to main content

Higher versus lower protein intake in formula-fed low birth weight infants

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 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
Higher versus lower protein intake in formula-fed low birth weight infants
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003959.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tanis R Fenton, Shahirose S Premji, Heidi Al-Wassia, Reg S Sauve

Abstract

The ideal quantity of dietary protein for formula-fed low birth weight infants is still a matter of debate. Protein intake must be sufficient to achieve normal growth without negative effects such as acidosis, uremia, and elevated levels of circulating amino acids.

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 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Norway 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 160 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 19%
Researcher 31 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 11%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Other 38 23%
Unknown 20 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 81 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 4%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 31 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#8,902,651
of 14,207,392 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,198
of 10,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,491
of 190,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#164
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,207,392 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,887 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.7. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 190,046 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.