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 |
Effects of infant massage on jaundiced neonates undergoing phototherapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Italian Journal of Pediatrics, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13052-015-0202-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chien-Heng Lin, Hsiu-Chuan Yang, Chien-Sheng Cheng, Chin-En Yen |
| Abstract |
Infant massage is a natural way for caregivers to improve health, sleep patterns, and reduce colic. We aimed to investigate the effects of infant massage on neonates with jaundice who are also receiving phototherapy. Full-term neonates with jaundice, admitted for phototherapy at a regional teaching hospital, were randomly allocated to either a control group or a massage group. The medical information for each neonate, including total feeding amount, body weight, defecation frequency, and bilirubin level, was collected and compared between two groups. A total of 56 patients were enrolled in the study. This included 29 neonates in the control group and 27 in the experimental group. On the third day, the massage group showed significantly higher defecation frequency (p = 0.045) and significantly lower bilirubin levels (p = 0.03) compared with the control group. No significant differences related to feeding amount or body weight were observed between the two groups. Infant massage could help to reduce bilirubin levels and increase defecation frequency in neonates receiving phototherapy for jaundice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 248 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 248 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 32 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 10% |
| Researcher | 20 | 8% |
| Other | 13 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 37 | 15% |
| Unknown | 109 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 66 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 7 | 3% |
| Psychology | 6 | 2% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 23 | 9% |
| Unknown | 114 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 September 2017.
All research outputs
#16,048,318
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#478
of 1,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,506
of 393,196 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Italian Journal of Pediatrics
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,059 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 393,196 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.