↓ Skip to main content

A randomised controlled trial of delayed cord clamping in very low birth weight preterm infants

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Pediatrics, September 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
139 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 Mendeley
Title
A randomised controlled trial of delayed cord clamping in very low birth weight preterm infants
Published in
European Journal of Pediatrics, September 2000
DOI 10.1007/pl00008345
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heike Rabe, Anne Wacker, Georg Hülskamp, Isabell Hörnig-Franz, Anne Schulze-Everding, Erik Harms, Ulrich Cirkel, Frank Louwen, Ralf Witteler, Hermann P. G. Schneider

Abstract

This study was carried out to assess the feasibility of late cord clamping of 45 s in preterm infants delivered mainly by caesarean section and the effects on postpartal adaptation and anaemia of prematurity. Prior to delivery, 40 infants of < 33 gestational weeks were randomised to either 20 s or 45 s of late cord clamping. After the first shoulder was delivered, oxytocin was given intravenously to the mother in order to enhance placento-fetal transfusion while the infant was held below the level of the placenta. The 20 infants in group 1 (20 s) had a mean birth weight of 1070 g and a mean gestational age of 29 + 4/7 weeks versus 1190 g and 30 weeks in group 2 (45 s). On day 42 of life there were ten infants without transfusions in group 2 versus three in group 1 (P < 0.05). Out of the 20 infants in group 1, 19 and 15/19 in group 2 were delivered by caesarean section. There were no significant differences in Apgar scores, temperature on admission, heart rate, blood pressure and requirements for artificial ventilation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 3%
Sweden 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
Unknown 73 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Other 19 25%
Unknown 12 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 55%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 12%
Neuroscience 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 15 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 December 2013.
All research outputs
#7,355,485
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#1,532
of 4,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,811
of 37,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,394 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 37,744 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.