↓ Skip to main content

Guidelines on Fetal Growth Restriction: A Comparison of Recent National Publications

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Perinatology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Guidelines on Fetal Growth Restriction: A Comparison of Recent National Publications
Published in
American Journal of Perinatology, September 2014
DOI 10.1055/s-0034-1387927
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Unterscheider, Keelin O'Donoghue, Fergal Malone

Abstract

Objective This study aims to compare recommendations from recently published national clinical guidelines for pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction (FGR). Materials and Methods Clinical guidelines informing best practice management of pregnancies with FGR issued by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada and the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists in the United Kingdom are reviewed together with the published literature on this topic. Results Each of the guidelines uses different terminology to describe pregnancies affected by suboptimal fetal growth; all of them agree that an estimated fetal weight < 10th centile should alert clinicians to small fetal size. All guidelines describe risk factor screening for improved detection of FGR and acknowledge the limited accuracy achieved with fundal height measurement. No agreement is reached over the value of fetal weight customization. All colleges have varied opinions regarding methods of Doppler surveillance, however agree that umbilical artery Doppler is beneficial as primary surveillance tool. Conclusions The results of this review relay significant inconsistencies and call for an urgent and practical international consensus on this important and common clinical topic. Current data were used to develop a clinical practice guideline for Ireland, which will be presented in context with this review.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 18%
Student > Postgraduate 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 33 58%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 11 19%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 06 April 2015.
All research outputs
#5,775,916
of 19,802,760 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Perinatology
#645
of 2,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,718
of 236,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Perinatology
#6
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,802,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,101 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 236,485 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.