↓ Skip to main content

Nutrient‐enriched formula versus standard formula for preterm infants

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2019
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
23 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
278 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
Nutrient‐enriched formula versus standard formula for preterm infants
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2019
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004204.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Verena Walsh, Jennifer Valeska Elli Brown, Lisa M Askie, Nicholas D Embleton, William McGuire

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 278 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 278 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Student > Master 27 10%
Researcher 26 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 6%
Other 16 6%
Other 39 14%
Unknown 120 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 13%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 2%
Psychology 5 2%
Other 28 10%
Unknown 140 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 15 November 2022.
All research outputs
#1,232,745
of 26,391,552 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,372
of 13,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,579
of 346,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#34
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,391,552 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,214 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 346,793 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.