↓ Skip to main content

Intermittent iron supplementation for improving nutrition and development in children under 12 years of age

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
247 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
Intermittent iron supplementation for improving nutrition and development in children under 12 years of age
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2011
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009085.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luz Maria De-Regil, Maria Elena D Jefferds, Allison C Sylvetsky, Therese Dowswell

Abstract

Approximately 600 million children of preschool and school age are anaemic worldwide. It is estimated that half of the cases are due to iron deficiency. Consequences of iron deficiency anaemia during childhood include growth retardation, reduced school achievement, impaired motor and cognitive development, and increased morbidity and mortality. The provision of daily iron supplements is a widely used strategy for improving iron status in children but its effectiveness has been limited due to its side effects, which can include nausea, constipation or staining of the teeth. As a consequence, intermittent iron supplementation (one, two or three times a week on non-consecutive days) has been proposed as an effective and safer alternative to daily supplementation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 247 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 237 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 17%
Researcher 43 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 14%
Student > Bachelor 30 12%
Unspecified 21 9%
Other 76 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 110 45%
Unspecified 35 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 10%
Social Sciences 24 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 7%
Other 36 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 02 March 2017.
All research outputs
#480,772
of 12,527,093 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,471
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,082
of 213,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#79
of 488 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,093 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 213,551 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 488 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.