| Title |
New directions in fetal surgery for myelomeningocele
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Child's Nervous System, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00381-017-3438-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sandra K. Kabagambe, Y. Julia Chen, Melissa A. Vanover, Payam Saadai, Diana L. Farmer |
| Abstract |
The treatment of children with myelomeningocele (MMC) has improved over time, from supportive management to early postnatal closure to prenatal repair of the defect. The Management of Myelomeningocele Study (MOMS) showed that prenatal repair of MMC resulted in improved neurological outcomes compared to postnatal closure. Follow-up studies showed that prenatal repair was, as with any other fetal intervention, associated with higher rates of obstetrical complications. There was no significant difference in urological outcomes. Long-term follow-up of ambulatory status, executive functioning, and urological outcomes is needed to determine the durable effects of fetal MMC repair on mobility, functional independence, and the prevalence of renal insufficiency in patients with MMC who survive to adulthood. The future of fetal MMC repair consists of developing strategies to reduce maternal morbidity and improve infant outcomes. Fetoscopic MMC repair has been suggested as an alternative to open repair that may reduce obstetrical complications and the need for cesarean delivery in subsequent pregnancies. Translational research using mesenchymal stromal cells to augment fetal repair of ovine MMC has shown improvement in motor function. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 14 | 22% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 43% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 8% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 8% |
| Unknown | 18 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 09 February 2021.
All research outputs
#3,976,381
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Child's Nervous System
#89
of 2,788 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,057
of 310,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child's Nervous System
#3
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,788 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 310,860 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.