↓ Skip to main content

Cesarean Section and Rate of Subsequent Stillbirth, Miscarriage, and Ectopic Pregnancy: A Danish Register-Based Cohort Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS Medicine, July 2014
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 (97th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
policy
1 policy source
twitter
33 tweeters
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
Cesarean Section and Rate of Subsequent Stillbirth, Miscarriage, and Ectopic Pregnancy: A Danish Register-Based Cohort Study
Published in
PLOS Medicine, July 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001670
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sinéad M. O'Neill, Esben Agerbo, Louise C. Kenny, Tine B. Henriksen, Patricia M. Kearney, Richard A. Greene, Preben Bo Mortensen, Ali S. Khashan

Abstract

With cesarean section rates increasing worldwide, clarity regarding negative effects is essential. This study aimed to investigate the rate of subsequent stillbirth, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy following primary cesarean section, controlling for confounding by indication.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 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 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 115 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 15%
Student > Master 15 13%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Other 29 24%
Unknown 17 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 48%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 11%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 4%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 23 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 67. 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 02 November 2017.
All research outputs
#428,508
of 19,152,115 outputs
Outputs from PLOS Medicine
#861
of 3,963 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,773
of 198,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS Medicine
#21
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,152,115 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,963 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 70.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 198,044 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.