↓ Skip to main content

Titrated oral misoprostol for augmenting labour to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
133 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
Titrated oral misoprostol for augmenting labour to improve maternal and neonatal outcomes
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010648.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vogel, Joshua P, West, Helen M, Dowswell, Therese, Joshua P Vogel, Helen M West, Therese Dowswell

Abstract

Labour dystocia is associated with a number of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Augmentation of labour is a commonly used intervention in cases of labour dystocia. Misoprostol is an inexpensive and stable prostaglandin E1 analogue that can be administered orally, vaginally, sublingually or rectally. Misoprostol has proven to be effective at stimulating uterine contractions although it can have serious, and even life-threatening side-effects. Titration refers to the process of adjusting the dose, frequency, or both, of a medication on the basis of frequent review to achieve optimal outcomes. Studies have reported on a range of misoprostol titration regimens used for labour induction and titrated misoprostol may potentially be effective and safe for augmentation of labour.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ethiopia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 130 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 22%
Student > Bachelor 21 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 14%
Researcher 18 14%
Other 6 5%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 23 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 14%
Social Sciences 12 9%
Psychology 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 31 23%

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 01 January 2014.
All research outputs
#2,062,456
of 10,747,137 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,736
of 9,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,284
of 154,189 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#53
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,747,137 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,034 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.1. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 154,189 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.