| Title |
Modeling manual perineal protection during vaginal delivery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-013-2164-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Magdalena Jansova, Vladimir Kalis, Zdenek Rusavy, Robert Zemcik, Libor Lobovsky, Katariina Laine |
| Abstract |
We compared hands-on manual perineal protection (MPP) and hands-off delivery techniques using the basic principles of mechanics and assessed the tension of perineal structures using a novel biomechanical model of the perineum. We also measured the effect of the thumb and index finger of the accoucheur's dominant-posterior hand on perineal tissue tension when a modified Viennese method of MPP is performed. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 74 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 12% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 24% |
| Unknown | 14 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 18% |
| Engineering | 7 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 4% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 19 | 26% |
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 29 September 2014.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#1,978
of 2,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,591
of 206,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#16
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 206,465 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.