↓ Skip to main content

School-age effects of the newborn individualized developmental care and assessment program for preterm infants with intrauterine growth restriction: preliminary findings

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
205 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
School-age effects of the newborn individualized developmental care and assessment program for preterm infants with intrauterine growth restriction: preliminary findings
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, February 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2431-13-25
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gloria McAnulty, Frank H Duffy, Sandra Kosta, Neil I Weisenfeld, Simon K Warfield, Samantha C Butler, Moona Alidoost, Jane Holmes Bernstein, Richard Robertson, David Zurakowski, Heidelise Als

Abstract

The experience in the newborn intensive care nursery results in premature infants' neurobehavioral and neurophysiological dysfunction and poorer brain structure. Preterms with severe intrauterine growth restriction are doubly jeopardized given their compromised brains. The Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program improved outcome at early school-age for preterms with appropriate intrauterine growth. It also showed effectiveness to nine months for preterms with intrauterine growth restriction. The current study tested effectiveness into school-age for preterms with intrauterine growth restriction regarding executive function (EF), electrophysiology (EEG) and neurostructure (MRI).

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 205 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 201 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 13%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 11%
Other 16 8%
Other 39 19%
Unknown 40 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 25%
Psychology 37 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 16%
Social Sciences 10 5%
Neuroscience 5 2%
Other 17 8%
Unknown 51 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 09 November 2017.
All research outputs
#2,902,546
of 21,344,814 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#440
of 2,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,628
of 170,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,344,814 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,731 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 170,068 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them