↓ Skip to main content

Antibiotics for meconium-stained amniotic fluid in labour for preventing maternal and neonatal infections

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 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 (83rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Antibiotics for meconium-stained amniotic fluid in labour for preventing maternal and neonatal infections
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007772.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thitiporn Siriwachirachai, Ussanee S Sangkomkamhang, Pisake Lumbiganon, Malinee Laopaiboon

Abstract

Chorioamnionitis is more likely to occur when meconium-stained amniotic fluid (MSAF) is present. Meconium may enhance the growth of bacteria in amniotic fluid by serving as a growth factor, inhibiting bacteriostatic properties of amniotic fluid. Many adverse neonatal outcomes related to MSAF result from meconium aspiration syndrome (MAS). MSAF is associated with both maternal and newborn infections. Antibiotics may be an effective option to reduce such morbidity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
France 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Unknown 103 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 21%
Student > Bachelor 17 15%
Student > Postgraduate 13 12%
Researcher 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Other 30 27%
Unknown 7 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Unspecified 10 9%
Psychology 6 5%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 16 15%
Unknown 7 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 27 December 2015.
All research outputs
#1,759,515
of 12,100,779 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#2,816
of 7,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,664
of 227,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#84
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,100,779 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,978 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 227,759 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 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 56% of its contemporaries.