↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional profile of newborns with microcephaly and factors associated with worse outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, October 2019
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 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 profile of newborns with microcephaly and factors associated with worse outcomes
Published in
Clinics, October 2019
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2019/e798
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samira Fernandes Morais Dos Santos, Fernanda Valente Mendes Soares, Andrea Dunshee de Abranches, Ana Carolina Carioca da Costa, Saint Clair Dos Santos Gomes-Júnior, Vania de Matos Fonseca, Maria Elisabeth Lopes Moreira

Abstract

To describe the nutritional profile of newborns with microcephaly and factors associated with worse outcomes during the first 14 days of life. This investigation is a longitudinal, descriptive study carried out in 21 full-term neonates exposed vertically to the Zika virus and hospitalized in a neonatal intensive care unit from February to September 2016. Patients receiving parenteral nutrition were excluded. Data analysis was performed using a generalized estimating equation model and Student's t-test to evaluate the association between worsening weight-for-age z-scores and independent clinical, sociodemographic and nutritional variables during hospitalization, with p<0.05 indicating significance. During hospitalization, there was a decrease in the mean values of the weight-for-age z-scores. The factors associated with worse nutritional outcomes were symptomatic exposure to the Zika virus, low maternal schooling, absence of maternal income and consumption of infant formula (p<0.05). Calcification and severe microcephaly were also associated with poor nutritional outcomes. Energy and macronutrient consumption remained below the recommendations and had an upward trend during hospitalization. The presence of cerebral calcification, the severity of microcephaly and symptomatic maternal exposure to Zika virus affected the nutritional status of newborns. In terms of nutritional factors, human milk intake had a positive impact, reducing weight loss in the first days of life. Other known factors, such as income and maternal schooling, were still associated with a poor nutritional status.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 11 17%
Unknown 22 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 6%
Psychology 4 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 26 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 October 2019.
All research outputs
#17,295,853
of 25,387,668 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#667
of 1,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,830
of 371,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#13
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,387,668 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 371,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.