↓ Skip to main content

The development and implementation of a training package for dietitians on cow’s milk protein allergy in infants and children based on UK RCPCH competencies for food allergies – a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical and Translational Allergy, February 2015
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)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
13 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
The development and implementation of a training package for dietitians on cow’s milk protein allergy in infants and children based on UK RCPCH competencies for food allergies – a pilot study
Published in
Clinical and Translational Allergy, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13601-015-0046-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liane Reeves, Rosan Meyer, Judith Holloway, Carina Venter

Abstract

Many food allergy guidelines have been published worldwide over recent years. The United Kingdom National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines and The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health food allergy care pathways require dietitians to assist with the diagnosis and management of food allergies, which highlighted the need for further education of dietitians to meet these competencies. The aim of this study was to design a competence based one day education course for dietitians on the diagnosis and management of cow's milk protein allergy in infants and children.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Andorra 1 6%
United States 1 6%
Unknown 15 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 12%
Student > Master 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Other 4 24%
Unknown 5 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 18%
Social Sciences 1 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 19 February 2016.
All research outputs
#1,344,903
of 13,630,849 outputs
Outputs from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#98
of 425 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,428
of 279,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical and Translational Allergy
#1
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,630,849 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 425 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 279,416 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 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them