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 |
Comparison of two nutrition assessment tools in surgical elderly inpatients in Northern China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12937-015-0054-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
JunDe Zhou, Miao Wang, HaiKuan Wang, Qiang Chi |
| Abstract |
Nutrition assessment enables early identification of malnourished patients and those at risk of malnutrition. To determine the prevalence of malnutrition, to analyze the correlation between short-form Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA-SF) and Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS2002) with classical nutritional markers among elderly hospitalized patients in surgery departments, with a view to improving nutrition advice for these patients. A total of 142 elderly patients admitted for surgery were enrolled in the study. Within 48 hours of admission, MNA-SF and NRS2002 scale, anthropometric measures and biochemical tests were carried out to assess the nutritional status of each patient. The prevalence of malnutrition classified by MNA-SF, NRS2002, BMI, serum albumin, hemoglobin, total lymphocyte count, handgrip strength, calf circumference and mid-arm circumference were 45 %, 38 %, 17 %, 22 %, 24 %, 71 %, 36 %, 12 % and 15 %, respectively. As the nutritional status classified by both MNA-SF and NRS2002 deteriorated, BMI, serum albumin, hemoglobin, handgrip strength, mid-arm circumference and calf circumference of patients with malnutrition were lower (P < 0.05). MNA-SF and NRS2002 had a unanimous correlation with classical nutritional markers (P < 0.05) except total lymphocyte count (P > 0.05). MNA-SF results showed a moderate agreement (P < 0.001) with NRS2002. Malnourished patients were older than well-nourished patients with NRS2002 (P < 0.05). Digestive disease patients tend to suffer from malnutrition, evaluated by MNA-SF (P < 0.05). The results show a relatively high prevalence of malnutrition among elderly patients in our general surgery department, especially in patients with digestive disease. NRS2002 and MNA-SF on elderly patients showed great consistency but significant difference in elderly patients with digestive disease. Both MNA-SF and NRS2002 correlated with each other and with BMI, serum albumin, hemoglobin, handgrip strength, calf circumference and mid-arm circumference. MNA-SF may be a more suitable tool for the nutrition assessment of surgical elderly inpatients. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 24 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 11% |
| Researcher | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 21 | 19% |
| Unknown | 29 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 35% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 9% |
| Unknown | 33 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 26 March 2016.
All research outputs
#6,149,981
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#833
of 1,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,981
of 262,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#27
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,428 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 262,658 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.