↓ Skip to main content

Implementation and evaluation of the Helping Babies Breathe curriculum in three resource limited settings: does Helping Babies Breathe save lives? A study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
232 Mendeley
Title
Implementation and evaluation of the Helping Babies Breathe curriculum in three resource limited settings: does Helping Babies Breathe save lives? A study protocol
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, March 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2393-14-116
Pubmed ID
Authors

Akash Bang, Roopa Bellad, Peter Gisore, Patricia Hibberd, Archana Patel, Shivaprasad Goudar, Fabian Esamai, Norman Goco, Sreelatha Meleth, Richard J Derman, Edward A Liechty, Elizabeth McClure, Waldemar A Carlo, Linda L Wright

Abstract

Neonatal deaths account for over 40% of all under-5 year deaths; their reduction is increasingly critical for achieving Millennium Development Goal 4. An estimated 3 million newborns die annually during their first month of life; half of these deaths occur during delivery or within 24 hours. Every year, 6 million babies require help to breathe immediately after birth. Resuscitation training to help babies breathe and prevent/manage birth asphyxia is not routine in low-middle income facility settings. Helping Babies Breathe (HBB), a simulation-training program for babies wherever they are born, was developed for use in low-middle income countries. We evaluated whether HBB training of facility birth attendants reduces perinatal mortality in the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development's Global Network research sites.

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 232 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 229 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 20%
Researcher 36 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 9%
Student > Postgraduate 20 9%
Other 17 7%
Other 49 21%
Unknown 43 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 87 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 15%
Social Sciences 23 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 61 26%
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 27 March 2014.
All research outputs
#18,369,403
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#3,452
of 4,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,541
of 224,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#84
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. 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 224,565 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 93 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.