↓ Skip to main content

Transplacental versus direct fetal corticosteroid treatment for accelerating fetal lung maturation where there is a risk of preterm birth

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 Mendeley
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.
Title
Transplacental versus direct fetal corticosteroid treatment for accelerating fetal lung maturation where there is a risk of preterm birth
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008981.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Debby P Utama, Caroline A Crowther

Abstract

Despite major advances in medical technology, the incidence of preterm birth remains high. The use of antenatal corticosteroid administered transplacentally, by intramuscular injection to women at risk of preterm birth, has reduced the incidence of respiratory distress syndrome and increased the survival rates of preterm infants. However, this intervention also comes with its own risks and side effects. Animal studies and early studies in pregnant women at risk of preterm birth have reported the use of an alternative route of administration, by direct intramuscular injection of corticosteroid into the fetus under ultrasound guidance, in an attempt to minimise the side-effect profile. Direct fetal corticosteroid administration may have benefits over maternal administration in terms of safety and efficacy. To assess if different routes of corticosteroid administration (maternal versus direct fetal) have effects on health outcomes for women and their babies. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (25 October 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (25 October 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomised controlled trials comparing maternal with direct fetal routes of antenatal corticosteroid administration in women at risk of preterm birth. The two review authors independently assessed study eligibility. In future updates of this review, at least two review authors will extract data and assess the risks of bias in included studies. We will also assess the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We did not identify any eligible randomised controlled trials to include in this review. The available clinical studies carried out so far on animals and human have shown that direct intramuscular injection of corticosteroid into the fetus under ultrasound guidance is feasible, but data on health outcomes are lacking. Uncertainty therefore persists as to which method could provide better efficacy and safety. Randomised controlled trials are required focusing on the benefits and harms of transplacental versus direct fetal corticosteroid treatment. Until the uncertainties have been addressed, it is advisable to stay with the current standard of antenatal transplacental maternally-administered corticosteroid treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 185 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 14%
Student > Master 20 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 9%
Researcher 15 8%
Student > Postgraduate 10 5%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 77 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 9%
Social Sciences 9 5%
Psychology 5 3%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 88 48%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 November 2018.
All research outputs
#6,920,320
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,535
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,729
of 342,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#153
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 342,469 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 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.