↓ Skip to main content

Fetal assessment methods for improving neonatal and maternal outcomes in preterm prelabour rupture of membranes

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

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

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
Fetal assessment methods for improving neonatal and maternal outcomes in preterm prelabour rupture of membranes
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010209.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gemma C Sharp, Sarah J Stock, Jane E Norman

Abstract

Fetal assessment following preterm prelabour rupture of membranes (PPROM) may result in earlier delivery due to earlier detection of fetal compromise. However, early delivery may not always be in the fetal or maternal interest, and the effectiveness of different fetal assessment methods in improving neonatal and maternal outcomes is uncertain.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 103 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 14%
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Master 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Postgraduate 9 9%
Other 25 24%
Unknown 17 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 41%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 17%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Psychology 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 3%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 25 24%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 12 January 2015.
All research outputs
#782,665
of 12,527,219 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,458
of 8,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,260
of 212,184 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#56
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,527,219 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,923 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 79% 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 212,184 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 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 73% of its contemporaries.