↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Current status of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition application: an assessment of nutritional prescriptions from 59 hospitals in the People’s Republic of China

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Current status of parenteral nutrition and enteral nutrition application: an assessment of nutritional prescriptions from 59 hospitals in the People’s Republic of China
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, February 2015
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s76636
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gang Han, Zhenwei Yu, Ke Ma

Abstract

The aim of the study reported here was to assess the use of parenteral nutrition (PN) and enteral nutrition (EN), and the prevalence of PN and EN formulas, in the People's Republic of China.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 19%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 16%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 25 February 2015.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#1,070
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,087
of 361,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#25
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 361,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.