↓ Skip to main content

Antioxidants for preventing pre-eclampsia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
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 (80th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter
patent
1 patent

Citations

dimensions_citation
188 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
315 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
Antioxidants for preventing pre-eclampsia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004227.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice Rumbold, Lelia Duley, Caroline A Crowther, Ross R Haslam

Abstract

Oxidative stress has been proposed as a key factor involved in the development of pre-eclampsia. Supplementing women with antioxidants during pregnancy may help to counteract oxidative stress and thereby prevent or delay the onset of pre-eclampsia. To determine the effectiveness and safety of any antioxidant supplementation during pregnancy and the risk of developing pre-eclampsia and its related complications. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (May 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1950 to October 2007) and Current Contents (1998 to August 2004). All randomised trials comparing one or more antioxidants with either placebo or no antioxidants during pregnancy for the prevention of pre-eclampsia, and trials comparing one or more antioxidants with another, or with other interventions. Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and trial quality and extracted data. Ten trials, involving 6533 women, were included in this review, five trials were rated high quality. For the majority of trials, the antioxidant assessed was combined vitamin C and E therapy. There was no significant difference between antioxidant and control groups for the relative risk (RR) of pre-eclampsia (RR 0.73, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.51 to 1.06; nine trials, 5446 women) or any other primary outcome: severe pre-eclampsia (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.76; two trials, 2495 women), preterm birth (before 37 weeks) (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.22; five trials, 5198 women), small-for-gestational-age infants (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.11; five trials, 5271 babies) or any baby death (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.53; four trials, 5144 babies). Women allocated antioxidants were more likely to self-report abdominal pain late in pregnancy (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.34; one trial, 1745 women), require antihypertensive therapy (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.57; two trials, 4272 women) and require an antenatal hospital admission for hypertension (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.39; one trial, 1877 women). However, for the latter two outcomes, this was not clearly reflected in an increase in any other hypertensive complications. Evidence from this review does not support routine antioxidant supplementation during pregnancy to reduce the risk of pre-eclampsia and other serious complications in pregnancy.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Ethiopia 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 306 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 65 21%
Student > Bachelor 42 13%
Researcher 29 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 9%
Student > Postgraduate 20 6%
Other 71 23%
Unknown 59 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 142 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 11%
Psychology 18 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 4%
Social Sciences 10 3%
Other 32 10%
Unknown 67 21%

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 September 2019.
All research outputs
#3,414,399
of 17,363,630 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,105
of 11,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,062
of 296,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#147
of 242 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,363,630 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 11,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. 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 296,727 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 242 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.