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 |
The timing of complementary feeding in preterm infants and the effect on overweight: study protocol for a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Systematic Reviews, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13643-016-0324-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Karin M. Vissers, Edith J. M. Feskens, Johannes B. van Goudoever, Arieke J. Janse |
| Abstract |
In term infants, there is evidence that early complementary feeding is a risk factor for childhood obesity. Therefore, timely introduction of complementary feeding during infancy is necessary. The World Health Organization (WHO) and European Society for Paediatric Gastroenterology Hepatology and Nutrition (ESPGHAN) both developed recommendations for the start of complementary feeding for term-born infants. However, these guidelines cannot be directly translated to preterm infants. Recent literature looking at the introduction of complementary feeding in preterm infants gives contrasting information. Given these contrasting reports on the introduction of solid foods in premature born infants, a systematic review is needed. The primary objective of this study is to analyze the effect of the time starting complementary feeding on overweight (including obesity) in preterm infants. An electronic systematic literature search with pre-defined terms will be conducted in Cochrane, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL. There will be no restriction for time period. Primarily, data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) will be included in this systematic review. Search terms will include preterm infants, complementary feeding, overweight, and their synonyms. Article selection, including risk of bias assessment, will be performed by three reviewers independently. Body mass index standard deviation score (BMI-SDS or BMI-Z-score) will be used to compare studies. The consistency of results across the studies will influence the decision whether or not to combine results in a meta-analysis. Studies that cannot be included in the meta-analysis will be described in a narrative analysis. This systematic review will give an overview of the existing knowledge on the timing of complementary feeding in preterm infants and the effect on overweight. It will form a basis for future guidelines for complementary feeding for preterm infants. PROSPERO CRD42015014215. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 64 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 13% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 18 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 23 | 36% |
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 31 January 2018.
All research outputs
#18,590,133
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#1,791
of 2,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,746
of 337,645 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#31
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,006 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 337,645 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.