↓ Skip to main content

Caesarean Delivery and Subsequent Stillbirth or Miscarriage: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2013
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 (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Caesarean Delivery and Subsequent Stillbirth or Miscarriage: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0054588
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sinéad M. O’Neill, Patricia M. Kearney, Louise C. Kenny, Ali S. Khashan, Tine B. Henriksen, Jennifer E. Lutomski, Richard A. Greene

Abstract

To compare the risk of stillbirth and miscarriage in a subsequent pregnancy in women with a previous caesarean or vaginal delivery.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 107 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 16%
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 20 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Psychology 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 27 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 10 June 2022.
All research outputs
#3,500,748
of 21,980,322 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#43,315
of 187,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,182
of 280,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,312
of 6,552 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,980,322 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 187,586 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. 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 280,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,552 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.