↓ Skip to main content

Early amniotomy and early oxytocin for prevention of, or therapy for, delay in first stage spontaneous labour compared with routine care

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
172 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
Early amniotomy and early oxytocin for prevention of, or therapy for, delay in first stage spontaneous labour compared with routine care
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006794.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shuqin Wei, Bi Lan Wo, Hui-Ping Qi, Hairong Xu, Zhong-Cheng Luo, Chantal Roy, William D Fraser

Abstract

Caesarean section rates are over 20% in many developed countries. The main diagnosis contributing to the high rate in nulliparae is dystocia or prolonged labour. The present review assesses the effects of a policy of early amniotomy with early oxytocin administration for the prevention of, or the therapy for, delay in labour progress.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 172 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 171 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 36 21%
Student > Master 27 16%
Researcher 24 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 8%
Other 10 6%
Other 33 19%
Unknown 29 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 17%
Psychology 7 4%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Other 13 8%
Unknown 39 23%

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 08 March 2020.
All research outputs
#9,616,920
of 17,443,211 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,183
of 11,690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,286
of 166,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#89
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,443,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.1. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 166,371 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.