↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional screening in hospitalized pediatric patients: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Jornal de Pediatria, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Nutritional screening in hospitalized pediatric patients: a systematic review
Published in
Jornal de Pediatria, July 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jped.2015.08.011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adriana Fonseca Teixeira, Kátia Danielle Araújo Lourenço Viana

Abstract

This systematic review aimed to verify the available scientific evidence on the clinical performance and diagnostic accuracy of nutritional screening tools in hospitalized pediatric patients. A search was performed in the Medline (National Library of Medicine United States), LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences), PubMed (US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health), in the SCIELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online), through CAPES portal (Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior), bases Scopus e Web of Science. The descriptors used in accordance with the Descriptors in Health Sciences (DeCS)/Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) list were "malnutrition", "screening", and "pediatrics", as well as the equivalent words in Portuguese. The authors identified 270 articles published between 2004 and 2014. After applying the selection criteria, 35 were analyzed in full and eight articles were included in the systematic review. We evaluated the methodological quality of the studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS). Five nutritional screening tools in pediatrics were identified. Among these, the Screening Tool for the Assessment of Malnutrition in Pediatrics (STAMP) showed high sensitivity, almost perfect inter-rater agreement and between the screening and the reference standard; the Screening Tool Risk on Nutritional Status and Growth (STRONGkids) showed high sensitivity, lower percentage of specificity, substantial intra-rater agreement, and ease of use in clinical practice. The studies included in this systematic review showed good performance of the nutritional screening tools in pediatrics, especially STRONGkids and STAMP. The authors emphasize the need to perform for more studies in this area. Only one tool was translated and adapted to the Brazilian pediatric population, and it is essential to carry out studies of tool adaptation and validation for this population.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 56 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 23%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Researcher 2 4%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 19 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Unknown 21 38%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 23 November 2018.
All research outputs
#3,537,231
of 15,417,469 outputs
Outputs from Jornal de Pediatria
#62
of 618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#74,620
of 345,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Jornal de Pediatria
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,417,469 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 618 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 345,256 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.