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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Home‐ versus hospital‐based phototherapy for the treatment of non‐haemolytic jaundice in infants at more than 37 weeks' gestation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd010212.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ujjwala S Malwade, Luke A Jardine |
| Abstract |
Phototherapy is commonly used for the treatment of neonatal jaundice, and home-based phototherapy is now being used in certain centres. Home-based phototherapy offers possible advantages by avoiding prolonged hospital admissions, promoting mother-infant bonding and reducing hospitalisation costs. Potential problems include increased duration of phototherapy, increased readmission to hospital and increased risk of bilirubin encephalopathy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| Nigeria | 1 | 20% |
| Namibia | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 151 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 24 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 12% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Researcher | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 18% |
| Unknown | 43 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 46 | 30% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 28 | 18% |
| Psychology | 7 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 48 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 June 2021.
All research outputs
#5,409,565
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,653
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,376
of 244,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#141
of 240 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 244,957 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 240 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.