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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Association between the use of a baby's bottle and pacifier and the absence of breastfeeding in the second six months of life
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1413-81232015204.00782014 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Renata Ribeiro Rigotti, Maria Inês Couto de Oliveira, Cristiano Siqueira Boccolini |
| Abstract |
The World Health Organization recommends breastfeeding for two years or more and advises against bottle feeding and pacifier use. Investigate the association between bottle feeding and pacifier use, and breastfeeding in the second half-year of life. Survey in a municipality of Rio de Janeiro state, in 2006, interviewing those responsible for 580 children aged 6-11 months. Bottle feeding and pacifier use, and variables which in the bivariate analysis were associated with the outcome 'absence of breastfeeding' (≥ 0.20), were selected for multiple analysis. Adjusted prevalence ratios were obtained by a Poisson regression model. 40% of the children 6-11 months were not being breastfed, 47% used a pacifier and 57% used a bottle. Pacifier use (PR = 3.245; CI95%: 2.490-4.228) and bottle feeding (PR = 1.605; CI95%: 1.273-2.023) were shown to be strongly associated with the outcome, and also with: mother's low schooling (PR = 0.826; CI95%: 0.689-0.990); low birth weight (PR = 1.488; CI95%: 1.159-1.910); mother not being the baby carer (PR = 1.324; CI95%: 1.080-1.622); and increasing age of the baby in days (PR = 1.004; CI95%: 1.002-1.006). The use of pacifiers and bottles can reduce continued breastfeeding. Stronger discouragement of these artifacts should be adopted in public health policies. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 22% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 15 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 26% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 24% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 4 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 28% |
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 14 May 2015.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#1,775
of 2,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,606
of 279,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ciência & Saúde Coletiva
#27
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 279,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.