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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effects of healthcare professional delivered early feeding interventions on feeding practices and dietary intake: A systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Appetite, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.appet.2017.12.001 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karen Matvienko-Sikar, Elaine Toomey, Lisa Delaney, Janas Harrington, Molly Byrne, Patricia M. Kearney, Choosing Healthy Eating for Infant Health study team |
| Abstract |
Childhood obesity is a global public health challenge. Parental feeding practices, such as responsive feeding, are implicated in the etiology of childhood obesity. This systematic review aimed to examine of effects of healthcare professional-delivered early feeding interventions, on parental feeding practices, dietary intake, and weight outcomes for children up to 2 years. The role of responsive feeding interventions was also specifically examined. Databases searched included: CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Maternity and Infant Care. participants are parents of children ≤2 years; intervention includes focus on early child feeding to prevent overweight and obesity; intervention delivered by healthcare professionals. Sixteen papers, representing 10 trials, met inclusion criteria for review. Six interventions included responsive feeding components. Interventions demonstrated inconsistent effects on feeding practices, dietary intake, and weight outcomes. Findings suggest some reductions in pressure to eat and infant consumption of non-core beverages. Responsive feeding based interventions demonstrate greater improvements in feeding approaches, and weight outcomes. The findings of this review highlight the importance of incorporating responsive feeding in healthcare professional delivered early feeding interventions to prevent childhood obesity. Observed inconsistencies across trials may be explained by methodological limitations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 28 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 10 | 36% |
| Australia | 4 | 14% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 11% |
| Israel | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 36% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 50% |
| Scientists | 9 | 32% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 5 | 18% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 156 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 22 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 9% |
| Researcher | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 30 | 19% |
| Unknown | 48 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 33 | 21% |
| Psychology | 11 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 53 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 08 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,914,950
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Appetite
#1,089
of 4,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,015
of 446,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Appetite
#26
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,785 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 446,047 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 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 67% of its contemporaries.