You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Intrapartum intervention rates and perinatal outcomes following successful external cephalic version
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Perinatology, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/jp.2015.220 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A Basu, C Flatley, S Kumar |
| Abstract |
To determine intrapartum and perinatal outcomes following successful external cephalic version for breech presentation at term. This was a retrospective cohort study of outcomes following successful external cephalic version in 411 women at an Australian tertiary maternity unit between November 2008 and March 2015. The study cohort was compared with a control group of 1236 women with cephalic presentation who underwent spontaneous labor. Intrapartum intervention rates and adverse neonatal outcomes were compared between both groups. The success rate of external cephalic version (ECV) was 66.4%. The spontaneous vaginal delivery rate in the study cohort was 59.4% (224/411) vs 72.8% (900/1236) in the control cohort (P<0.001). Intrapartum intervention rates (emergency cesarean section (CS) and instrumental delivery) were higher in the ECV group (38% vs 27.2%, P<0.001). Rates of emergency CS for non-reassuring fetal status (9.5%, 39/411 vs 4.4%, 54/1236, P⩽0.001) and failure to progress (13.4%, 55/411 vs 4.1%, 51/1236, P<0.001) were higher in the study cohort. Neonatal outcomes were worse in the study cohort-Apgar score <7 at 5 min (2.2%, 9/411 vs 0.6%, 8/1236, P<0.001) and abnormal cord gases (8.5%, 35/411 vs 0.2%, 3/1236, P<0.001). Rates for resuscitation at birth and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit were higher in the study cohort (6.1% vs 4.1% and 1.9% vs 1.1%, respectively) but these were not statistically significant. Labor following successful ECV is more likely to result in increased intrapartum intervention rates and poorer neonatal outcomes.Journal of Perinatology advance online publication, 21 January 2016; doi:10.1038/jp.2015.220. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 9 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 42% |
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 30 January 2017.
All research outputs
#13,454,350
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Perinatology
#1,741
of 2,658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,194
of 394,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Perinatology
#47
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,658 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 394,770 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.