↓ Skip to main content

Knowledge, attitudes and misconceptions of Italian healthcare professionals regarding fever management in children

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pediatrics, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
Knowledge, attitudes and misconceptions of Italian healthcare professionals regarding fever management in children
Published in
BMC Pediatrics, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12887-018-1173-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elena Chiappini, Antonina Marta Cangelosi, Paolo Becherucci, Monica Pierattelli, Luisa Galli, Maurizio de Martino

Abstract

Fever phobia is still a major issue in paediatrics. We report knowledge of a sample of Italian paediatricians performed six years after the release of the Italian guidelines for the management of fever in children (IFG). A questionnaire, developed following the IFG recommendations and previously administered to 300 paediatricians in 2012, was proposed to all the paediatricians attending the 2015 National Congress of Practice Paediatrics, held in Florence, Italy. Changes in answers over time were analyzed. 70.2% (562/800) paediatricians returned the questionnaire. The recommended site and device for body temperature measurement in children > 1 year was correctly chosen by 89.3% of participants (vs. 80.7% of 2012 participants; P < 0.001), but with children aged less than 1 year the correct answer was selected only by the 50.3% (vs. 39.3% of 2012 participants: P < 0.001). Use of physical methods was still incorrectly recommended by 51.6% of paediatricians (vs. 63.6% in 2012; P < 0.001). Use of antipyretics according to discomfort was adopted only by 38.2% of participants, while 12.2% of them recommended alternate use of antipyretics. These proportions were substantially stable since 2012 (45 and 11% respectively), rectal administration of antipyretics only in case of vomiting was correctly recommended by 86.8% of paediatricians vs. 74.7% in 2012 (P < 0.001). Improvements in some pediatricians' misconceptions were observed over time. However, some incorrect habits persist. Further studies are needed to better understand the "weak points" of the communication between Scientific Societies and paediatricians in order to impact everyday clinical practice.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 26 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Psychology 2 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 31 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 19 June 2018.
All research outputs
#5,829,019
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#924
of 3,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,072
of 328,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#47
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,051 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 328,114 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.