↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy and impact of prenatal diagnosis in infants with omphalocele

Overview of attention for article published in Pediatric Surgery International, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Accuracy and impact of prenatal diagnosis in infants with omphalocele
Published in
Pediatric Surgery International, April 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00383-018-4265-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Conner, Jenny Hammarqvist Vejde, Carmen Mesas Burgos

Abstract

Associated anomalies in omphalocele are common, but to which extent these anomalies are diagnosed before or after birth is less well documented. To investigate the different types of associated anomalies, long-term survival and the extent whether these are diagnosed pre- or postnatally in children with a prenatal diagnosis of omphalocele at a single institution. Retrospective review of all pregnancies with omphalocele managed and/or born at our institution between 2006 and 2016. A total of 42 cases with prenatally diagnosed omphalocele were identified. Of those 14 (31%) decided to terminate the pregnancy (TOP). Of the remaining 28 that continued, 12 were giant omphaloceles. The overall mortality rate was 18, 25% for giant and 12% for non-giant omphaloceles. 64% had associated anomalies. Only 1/3 of these anomalies is diagnosed prenatally. The rate of associated malformations that are diagnosed postnatally is high, but the majority was malformations with a minor clinical significance or impact on future health. Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome was present only in cases of non-giant omphalocele in our cohort.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 21%
Student > Master 8 11%
Other 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 6%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 24 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Chemistry 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 28 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 02 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,005,966
of 23,085,832 outputs
Outputs from Pediatric Surgery International
#547
of 1,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,936
of 329,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pediatric Surgery International
#8
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,085,832 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,273 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 329,376 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.