↓ Skip to main content

Lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio and lamellar body count for fetal lung maturity: a meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 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
Lecithin/sphingomyelin ratio and lamellar body count for fetal lung maturity: a meta-analysis
Published in
European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology, March 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2013.02.013
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anouk E. Besnard, Soetinah A.M. Wirjosoekarto, Kimiko A. Broeze, Brent C. Opmeer, Ben Willem J. Mol

Abstract

To determine and compare the diagnostic accuracy of the lecithin/sphingomyelin (L/S) ratio and lamellar body count (LBC) in the prediction of neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS). A systematic review was performed to identify studies comparing either the L/S ratio or the LBC with the occurrence of RDS published between January 1999 and February 2009. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. For each study sensitivity and specificity were calculated. Summary receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves, assessing the diagnostic performance of both tests, were constructed. A subgroup analysis was performed to estimate the sensitivity and specificity of the various cut-off values. 13 studies were included. The ROC curves of the collected data illustrate that the LBC and L/S ratio perform equally well in the prediction of RDS. Comparison of the two summary ROC curves of each test indicates that the diagnostic performance of LBC might even have a slight advantage over L/S ratio. Due to the wide cut-off range it was not possible to define specific cut-off values with the best accuracy. We recommend replacing the L/S ratio as gold standard with the lamellar body count since the LBC is easy to perform, rapid, inexpensive, and available to all hospitals 24h per day.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 4%
Switzerland 1 4%
Unknown 26 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 25%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 18%
Student > Postgraduate 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 11%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 61%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Engineering 2 7%
Decision Sciences 1 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 3 11%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 April 2019.
All research outputs
#7,356,343
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology
#882
of 3,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,823
of 207,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology & Reproductive Biology
#12
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 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 76% 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 207,751 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 74% of its contemporaries.