↓ Skip to main content

Deflation of gastric band balloon in pregnancy for improving outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 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
Deflation of gastric band balloon in pregnancy for improving outcomes
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010048.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda E Jefferys, Dimitrios Siassakos, Tim Draycott, Valentine A Akande, Robert Fox

Abstract

In line with the rise in the prevalence of obesity, an increasing number of women of childbearing age are undergoing laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), resulting in an increasing number of pregnancies with a band in place. Currently, there is no consensus on optimal band management in pregnancy. Some clinicians advocate leaving the band balloon inflated to reduce gestational weight gain and associated adverse perinatal outcomes. However, there are concerns that maintaining balloon inflation during pregnancy might increase the risk of band complications and adversely affect fetal development and/or growth as a result of reduced nutritional intake.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
Australia 1 1%
Peru 1 1%
France 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 79 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 20%
Researcher 13 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Unspecified 12 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Other 18 21%
Unknown 1 1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 44%
Unspecified 17 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 13%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Psychology 5 6%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 1 1%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 May 2013.
All research outputs
#7,860,083
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,850
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,211
of 145,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#93
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 145,784 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.