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 |
Which intrauterine growth restricted fetuses at term benefit from early labour induction? A secondary analysis of the DIGITAT randomised trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.10.014 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Parvin Tajik, Linda van Wyk, Kim E. Boers, Saskia le Cessie, Mohammad Hadi Zafarmand, Frans Roumen, Joris A.M. van der Post, Martina Porath, Maria G. van Pampus, Marc E.A. Spaanderdam, Anneke Kwee, Johannes J. Duvekot, Henk A. Bremer, Friso M.C. Delemarre, Kitty W.M. Bloemenkamp, Christianne J.M. de Groot, Christine Willekes, Jan M.M. van Lith, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Ben W.J. Mol, Sicco A. Scherjon, for the DIGITAT Study Group |
| Abstract |
The Disproportionate Intrauterine Growth Intervention Trial at Term (DIGITAT trial) showed that in women with suspected intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) at term, there were no substantial outcome differences between induction of labour and expectant monitoring. The objective of the present analysis is to evaluate whether maternal or fetal markers could identify IUGR fetuses who would benefit from early labour induction. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| France | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 182 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 178 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 39 | 21% |
| Unknown | 49 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 5 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 8% |
| Unknown | 57 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 December 2020.
All research outputs
#7,778,730
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology
#945
of 3,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,218
of 223,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology
#15
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,869 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 223,617 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 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 55% of its contemporaries.