↓ Skip to main content

Caesarean section versus vaginal delivery for preterm birth in singletons

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
27 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
259 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
Caesarean section versus vaginal delivery for preterm birth in singletons
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000078.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zarko Alfirevic, Stephen J Milan, Stefania Livio

Abstract

Planned caesarean delivery for women thought be in preterm labour may be protective for baby, but could also be quite traumatic for both mother and baby. The optimal mode of delivery of preterm babies for both cephalic and breech presentation remains, therefore, controversial.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 259 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 248 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 52 20%
Researcher 38 15%
Student > Bachelor 31 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 24 9%
Other 85 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 151 58%
Unspecified 36 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 5%
Psychology 11 4%
Other 21 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 18 September 2019.
All research outputs
#600,413
of 13,644,402 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,881
of 10,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,403
of 160,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#20
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,644,402 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 10,696 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 160,459 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.