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 |
When timing and dose of nutrition support were examined, the modified Nutrition Risk in Critically Ill (mNUTRIC) score did not differentiate high-risk patients who would derive the most benefit from nutrition support: a prospective cohort study
|
---|---|
Published in |
Annals of Intensive Care, October 2018
|
DOI | 10.1186/s13613-018-0443-1 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Charles Chin Han Lew, Gabriel Jun Yung Wong, Ka Po Cheung, Robert J. L. Fraser, Ai Ping Chua, Mary Foong Fong Chong, Michelle Miller |
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 % |
---|---|---|
Singapore | 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Unknown | 38 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 6 | 16% |
Student > Master | 6 | 16% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
Other | 5 | 13% |
Unknown | 12 | 32% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 26% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 18% |
Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
Other | 2 | 5% |
Unknown | 14 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 July 2019.
All research outputs
#15,030,198
of 23,122,481 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#795
of 1,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,976
of 349,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#20
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,122,481 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.9. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 349,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.