↓ Skip to main content

Vitamin K prior to preterm birth for preventing neonatal periventricular haemorrhage

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions
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
Vitamin K prior to preterm birth for preventing neonatal periventricular haemorrhage
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2000
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000229
Pubmed ID
Authors

Crowther, C A, Henderson-Smart, D J, Crowther, Caroline A, Crosby, Danielle D, Henderson-Smart, David J

Abstract

Preterm infants are at risk of periventricular haemorrhage. This can damage the brain and lead to neurodevelopmental abnormalities, including cerebral palsy. It has been suggested that vitamin K might improve coagulation in preterm infants. The objective of this review was to assess the effects of vitamin K administered to women at risk of imminent very preterm birth to prevent periventricular haemorrhage and associated neurological injury in the infant. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and bibliographies up to January 1999. Randomised or quasi-randomised trials of vitamin K administered parenterally or orally to women at risk of imminent preterm birth. The primary outcomes were neonatal mortality, neonatal neurological morbidity, as measured by the presence of periventricular haemorrhage (PVH) on ultrasound during the first week of life, and long term neurodevelopment. Secondary outcomes included other neonatal morbidity and any maternal side effects. Eligibility, trial quality assessment and data extraction were done independently by two reviewers. Five trials were included, involving more than 420 women. The trials were of variable quality. Antenatal vitamin K was associated with a non-significant trend to a reduction in all grades of periventricular haemorrhage (relative risk (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67-1.00) and in severe PVH (grades 3 and 4) (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.45-1.25) for babies receiving prenatal vitamin K compared with control babies. This trend disappeared when poorer quality trials were excluded. Information on neurodevelopment was given for a small sample of children in one trial and no differences were seen. Vitamin K administered to women prior to very preterm birth does not appear to be able to significantly prevent periventricular haemorrhages in preterm infants.

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 June 2013.
All research outputs
#2,484,441
of 9,307,553 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,061
of 8,941 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,658
of 222,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#101
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,307,553 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 59th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,941 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.6. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 222,986 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.