↓ Skip to main content

Child maltreatment and pediatric asthma: a review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Asthma Research and Practice, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Child maltreatment and pediatric asthma: a review of the literature
Published in
Asthma Research and Practice, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40733-016-0022-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hannah M. C. Schreier, Edith Chen, Gregory E. Miller

Abstract

Child maltreatment is a common problem with known adverse consequences, yet its contributions to the development and course of pediatric asthma are only poorly understood. This review first describes possible pathways connecting child maltreatment to pediatric asthma, including aspects of the physical home environment, health behaviors and disease management, and psychological consequences of child maltreatment. We subsequently review existing studies, which generally report an association between maltreatment experiences and asthma outcomes in childhood. However, this literature is in its early stages; there are only a handful studies, most of them rely on self-reports of both child maltreatment and asthma history, and none have investigated the physiological underpinnings of this association. Taken together, however, the studies are suggestive of child maltreatment playing a role in pediatric asthma incidence and expression that should be explored further. Existing data are sparse and do not allow for specific conclusions. However, the data are suggestive of child maltreatment influencing asthma risk and morbidity long before the adult years. Future research should focus on understanding how child maltreatment contributes to asthma disease risk and progression in this highly vulnerable population.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Student > Master 4 9%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 20%
Psychology 9 20%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 17 37%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 September 2018.
All research outputs
#13,974,021
of 22,860,626 outputs
Outputs from Asthma Research and Practice
#59
of 81 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,227
of 300,920 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Asthma Research and Practice
#3
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,860,626 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 81 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 300,920 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.