↓ Skip to main content

Reducing Neonatal Mortality in India: Critical Role of Access to Emergency Obstetric Care

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 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
Reducing Neonatal Mortality in India: Critical Role of Access to Emergency Obstetric Care
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0057244
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anu Rammohan, Kazi Iqbal, Niyi Awofeso

Abstract

Neonatal mortality currently accounts for 41% of all global deaths among children below five years. Despite recording a 33% decline in neonatal deaths between 2000 and 2009, about 900,000 neonates died in India in 2009. The decline in neonatal mortality is slower than in the post-neonatal period, and neonatal mortality rates have increased as a proportion of under-five mortality rates. Neonatal mortality rates are higher among rural dwellers of India, who make up at least two-thirds of India's population. Identifying the factors influencing neonatal mortality will significantly improve child survival outcomes in India.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 151 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 20%
Researcher 19 12%
Student > Postgraduate 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 9%
Other 33 21%
Unknown 28 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 33%
Social Sciences 27 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 10%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 36 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 April 2024.
All research outputs
#16,485,659
of 25,048,615 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#145,905
of 217,341 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,340
of 202,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,130
of 5,340 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,048,615 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 217,341 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.7. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 202,918 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,340 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.