↓ Skip to main content

Continuous versus bolus intragastric tube feeding for preterm and low birth weight infants with gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease

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

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
Continuous versus bolus intragastric tube feeding for preterm and low birth weight infants with gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009719.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robyn Richards, Jann P Foster, Kim Psaila

Abstract

Gastro-oesophageal reflux disease is a particularly common condition in preterm and low birth weight infants. These infants are also more likely to have excessive regurgitation, as they do not have a fully developed antireflux mechanism. Preterm and low birth weight infants who are unable to suck oral feeds are required to be fed via an intragastric tube for varying lengths of time. Intragastric tube feeding can be delivered by the intermittent bolus or continuous feeding method. Use of continuous or intermittent bolus intragastric feeding may have a positive or negative effect on the incidence or severity of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 125 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Researcher 11 9%
Other 8 6%
Other 23 18%
Unknown 34 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 39 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 16%
Psychology 7 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 43 34%