↓ Skip to main content

Umbilical cord antiseptics for preventing sepsis and death among newborns

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
33 tweeters
facebook
5 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
246 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
Umbilical cord antiseptics for preventing sepsis and death among newborns
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008635.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aamer Imdad, Resti Ma M Bautista, Kathlynne Anne A Senen, Ma Esterlita V Uy, Jacinto Blas Mantaring III, Zulfiqar A Bhutta

Abstract

The umbilical cord is a structure made of blood vessels and connective tissue that connects the baby and placenta in utero. The umbilical cord is cut after birth, which separates the mother and her baby both physically and symbolically. Omphalitis is defined as infection of the umbilical cord stump. Tracking of bacteria along the umbilical vessels may lead to septicaemia that can result in neonatal morbidity and mortality, especially in developing countries.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 246 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 239 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 51 21%
Student > Bachelor 38 15%
Researcher 29 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 11%
Other 16 7%
Other 50 20%
Unknown 36 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 114 46%
Nursing and Health Professions 48 20%
Social Sciences 18 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 1%
Other 16 7%
Unknown 40 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 01 November 2017.
All research outputs
#590,546
of 14,454,606 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,708
of 10,975 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,723
of 153,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#11
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,454,606 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,975 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 153,359 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 128 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.