↓ Skip to main content

Interventions for treating cholestasis in pregnancy

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
195 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
Interventions for treating cholestasis in pregnancy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000493.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vinita Gurung, Michael Stokes, Philippa Middleton, Stephen J Milan, William Hague, Jim G Thornton

Abstract

Obstetric cholestasis has been linked to adverse maternal and fetal/neonatal outcomes. As the pathophysiology is poorly understood, therapies have been empiric. The first version of this review, published in 2001, and including nine randomised controlled trials involving 227 women, concluded that there was insufficient evidence to recommend any of the interventions alone or in combination. This is the first update.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 190 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 18%
Researcher 27 14%
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 12%
Other 19 10%
Other 36 18%
Unknown 27 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 115 59%
Psychology 14 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 7%
Social Sciences 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 10 5%
Unknown 32 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 23 October 2018.
All research outputs
#3,000,122
of 13,663,123 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,498
of 10,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,663
of 153,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#62
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,663,123 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,703 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 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 153,124 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.