↓ Skip to main content

Enteral tube feeding for older people with advanced dementia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2009
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 (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
33 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
296 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
425 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Enteral tube feeding for older people with advanced dementia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2009
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007209.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elizabeth L Sampson, Bridget Candy, Louise Jones

Abstract

The use of enteral tube feeding for patients with advanced dementia who have poor nutritional intake is common. In one US survey 34% of 186,835 nursing home residents with advanced cognitive impairment were tube fed. Potential benefits or harms of this practice are unclear.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 425 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
Malaysia 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 404 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 79 19%
Student > Bachelor 66 16%
Researcher 52 12%
Other 36 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 8%
Other 116 27%
Unknown 41 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 200 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 64 15%
Social Sciences 23 5%
Psychology 20 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 4%
Other 37 9%
Unknown 62 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 53. 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 June 2020.
All research outputs
#429,108
of 15,842,641 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,042
of 11,299 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,607
of 127,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,842,641 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,299 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 127,938 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 103 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 95% of its contemporaries.