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 |
Differences in infant feeding practices between Chinese-born and Australian-born mothers living in Australia: a cross-sectional study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pediatrics, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12887-018-1157-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kristy A. Bolton, Peter Kremer, Kylie D. Hesketh, Rachel Laws, Konsita Kuswara, Karen J. Campbell |
| Abstract |
Chinese immigrants are the third largest immigrant group in Australia. Recent qualitative evidence from Victorian Maternal and Child Health nurses indicate that infants of Chinese parents commonly have rapid growth trajectories and that high value is placed on rapid growth and having a fatter child; with low breastfeeding rates and overfeeding of infant formula. The aim of this study was to compare infant feeding practices (breastfeeding, infant formula, other liquids, solids) of Chinese-born and Australian-born mothers living in Australia. Using the Australian National Infant Feeding Survey dataset (2010-2011), infant feeding data from Chinese-born mothers (n = 602) were compared with a random sub-sample of Australian-born mothers (n = 602). Group differences on feeding practices were tested using Chi-square or t-tests and the effect of ethnicity on infant feeding behaviours assessed using regression. Compared to infants of Australian-born mothers, infants of Chinese-born mothers were younger when they first consumed infant formula, water-based drinks and fruit juice and older when they first ate solid foods (p < 0.05). Furthermore, infants of Chinese-born mothers were less likely to have ever had cow's milk (OR: 0.37 95%CI:, 0.18-0.78) and solids (0.41, 0.25-0.68); but were more likely to have ever had infant formula (2.19, 1.32-3.62), water (2.45, 1.55-3.87), toddler milk (3.39, 1.60-7.18), water-based drinks (e.g. cordial, soft drink, tea; 2.48, 1.12-5.49), and fruit juice (4.03, 2.50-6.51). Those ≤4 months of age were more likely to have had water-based drinks (7.77, 1.96-30.77) and fruit juice (3.44, 1.14-10.38) (p < 0.05) compared to infants of Australian-born mothers. Differences in mothers' early infant feeding practices exist between Chinese-born and Australian-born mothers living in Australia. Better understanding these ethnically patterned infant feeding practices is important for identifying key opportunities to promote best nutrition and growth in early life in different ethnic groups within our population. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 6 | 55% |
| Ireland | 2 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 5 | 45% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 27% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 27% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 108 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 17 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Unknown | 41 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 27 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 12% |
| Psychology | 5 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 11% |
| Unknown | 43 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 2019.
All research outputs
#2,031,916
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pediatrics
#264
of 3,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,681
of 329,253 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pediatrics
#13
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 329,253 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 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.