↓ Skip to main content

Symphysiotomy for feto-pelvic disproportion

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 tweeters

Readers on

mendeley
131 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
Symphysiotomy for feto-pelvic disproportion
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd005299.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

G Justus Hofmeyr, P Mike Shweni

Abstract

Symphysiotomy is an operation in which the fibres of the pubic symphysis are partially divided to allow separation of the joint and thus enlargement of the pelvic dimensions during childbirth. It is performed with local analgesia and does not require an operating theatre nor advanced surgical skills. It may be a lifesaving procedure for the mother or the baby, or both, in several clinical situations. These include: failure to progress in labour when caesarean section is unavailable, unsafe or declined by the mother; and obstructed birth of the aftercoming head of a breech presenting baby. Criticism of the operation because of complications, particularly pelvic instability, and as being a 'second best' option has resulted in its decline or disappearance from use in many countries. Several large observational studies have reported high rates of success, low rates of complications and very low mortality rates.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 125 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 19%
Student > Master 22 17%
Student > Bachelor 21 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 7%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 25 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 13%
Social Sciences 12 9%
Psychology 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 30 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 06 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,205,873
of 15,655,368 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,257
of 11,234 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,617
of 261,318 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#171
of 468 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,655,368 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,234 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 261,318 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 468 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 63% of its contemporaries.