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 |
The effect of vitamin A on renal damage following acute pyelonephritis in children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Pediatrics, September 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00431-010-1297-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Parviz Ayazi, Seyed Alireza Moshiri, Abolfazl Mahyar, Mona Moradi |
| Abstract |
Animal studies suggest that administration of vitamin A to rats with experimental urinary tract infection decreases the frequency of renal scars (Kavukçu et al., BJU Int 83(9):1055-1059, 1999). The aim of this study was to determine the effect of vitamin A on the rate of permanent renal damage in children with acute pyelonephritis. Fifty children, median age of 24 months (range 2-144), with first-time pyelonephritis verified by an uptake defect on acute dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) scan were included in the study and randomly allocated to the case or control groups. All were given intravenous ceftriaxone for 10 days followed by oral cephalexin for 3 months. Cases in addition were given a single intramuscular dose of vitamin A, 25,000 U for infants below 1 year of age and 50,000 U for older children. At the repeat DMSA scan after 3 months, five of 25 cases (20%) and 17 of 25 controls (68%) had abnormal findings (p = 0.001). In conclusion, administration of vitamin A was associated with a significantly lower rate of permanent renal damage. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 5 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 46% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
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 16 November 2011.
All research outputs
#18,300,116
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#3,078
of 3,663 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,417
of 96,448 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#23
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,663 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 96,448 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.