↓ Skip to main content

Recent Advances on Nutrition in Treatment of Acute Pancreatitis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
Recent Advances on Nutrition in Treatment of Acute Pancreatitis
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00762
Pubmed ID
Authors

Li-Long Pan, Jiahong Li, Muhammad Shamoon, Madhav Bhatia, Jia Sun

Abstract

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common abdominal acute inflammatory disorder and the leading cause of hospital admission for gastrointestinal disorders in many countries. Clinical manifestations of AP vary from self-limiting local inflammation to devastating systemic pathological conditions causing significant morbidity and mortality. To date, despite extensive efforts in translating promising experimental therapeutic targets in clinical trials, disease-specific effective remedy remains obscure, and supportive care has still been the primary treatment for this disease. Emerging evidence, in light of the current state of pathophysiology of AP, has highlighted that strategic initiation of nutrition with appropriate nutrient supplementation are key to limit local inflammation and to prevent or manage AP-associated complications. The current review focuses on recent advances on nutritional interventions including enteral versus parenteral nutrition strategies, and nutritional supplements such as probiotics, glutamine, omega-3 fatty acids, and vitamins in clinical AP, hoping to advance current knowledge and practice related to nutrition and nutritional supplements in clinical management of AP.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 143 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 14%
Student > Master 19 13%
Other 12 8%
Researcher 11 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 8%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 53 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 2%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 55 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 August 2017.
All research outputs
#14,403,805
of 25,576,801 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#11,520
of 31,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,941
of 327,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#179
of 407 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,801 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,990 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 327,941 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 407 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.