↓ Skip to main content

Vitamin-D status and neurodevelopment and growth in young north Indian children: a secondary data analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
124 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
Vitamin-D status and neurodevelopment and growth in young north Indian children: a secondary data analysis
Published in
Nutrition Journal, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12937-017-0285-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ranadip Chowdhury, Sunita Taneja, Nita Bhandari, Ingrid Kvestad, Tor A. Strand, Maharaj Kishan Bhan

Abstract

Vitamin-D deficiency has been linked with impaired development in animal studies; however, the evidence from human studies is scanty. Evidence as to whether vitamin-D deficiency during early childhood affects growth is also limited and conflicting. We examined the extent to which vitamin-D deficiency (<10 ng/ml) is associated with neurodevelopment and physical growth in young children. We used data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) of daily folic acid and/ or vitamin B12 supplementation for six months in children aged 6 to 30 months conducted in Delhi, India. We measured vitamin-D status and  neurodevelopment by the Ages and Stages Questionnaire-3 (ASQ-3) at 12 to 36 months of age. Multiple logistic and linear regressions were used to examine the association between vitamin-D deficiency at baseline and neurodevelopment and growth 6 months follow-up. 25-hydroxy-vitamin-D (25OHD) concentration was measured at baseline for 960 (96%) children. Of these, 331 (34.5%) children were vitamin-D deficient. The total and subscale (except for the Personal social scale) ASQ-3 scores, were not different between the vitamin-D deficient and non-deficient children. Vitamin-D deficiency was also not associated with physical growth at baseline and at follow -up. Our data do not support the hypothesis that vitamin-D deficiency is associated with poor growth and neurodevelopment. NCT00717730 and CTRI/2010/091/001090 . Date of registration: 08 October, 2010.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 124 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 124 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 15%
Researcher 14 11%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 31 25%
Unknown 30 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 27 22%
Psychology 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 34 27%

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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#7,365,136
of 11,823,343 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#828
of 1,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,340
of 269,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#15
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,823,343 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,005 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.2. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 269,426 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.