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 |
Cronobacter Species Contamination of Powdered Infant Formula and the Implications for Neonatal Health
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pediatrics, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fped.2015.00056 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gautam Kalyantanda, Lyudmila Shumyak, Lennox Kenneth Archibald |
| Abstract |
Cronobacter is a class of Enterobacteriaceae that cause infections in neonates, especially those born prematurely. Over 90% of these infections have been linked epidemiologically to powdered infant formula (PIF). Contamination of PIF can occur at manufacture, reconstitution, or storage of reconstituted product. Intrinsic properties that enable Cronobacter to cause disease include resistance to heat, ultraviolet radiation, oxygen radicals, stomach acids, and pasteurization; an ability to utilize sialic acid (a nutrition additive to PIF that facilitates the organism's growth and survival), and an exceptional affinity for biofilms in enteral feeding tubes. As part of ongoing endeavors to reduce the incidence of neonatal PIF-associated Cronobacter infections, the World Health Organization and the US Food and Drug Administration have established guidelines for PIF production, preparation for infant feeding, and storage of reconstituted product. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Argentina | 1 | 17% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 89 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 29 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 15 | 17% |
| Unknown | 32 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 16 June 2022.
All research outputs
#2,950,311
of 23,671,454 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#486
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,974
of 264,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pediatrics
#6
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,671,454 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 264,582 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.