↓ 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 (55th 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
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
152 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 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 151 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 33 22%
Student > Master 28 18%
Researcher 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Other 9 6%
Other 27 18%
Unknown 20 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 72 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 16%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Psychology 5 3%
Environmental Science 4 3%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 31 20%

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
#8,524,778
of 15,787,688 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,718
of 11,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,543
of 160,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#88
of 128 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,787,688 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 23.5. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 160,305 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 55% 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 is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.