↓ Skip to main content

Perinatal outcomes in women over 40 years of age compared to those of other gestations

Overview of attention for article published in Einstein (São Paulo), March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Perinatal outcomes in women over 40 years of age compared to those of other gestations
Published in
Einstein (São Paulo), March 2015
DOI 10.1590/s1679-45082015ao3204
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evandro Eduardo Canhaço, Angela Mendes Bergamo, Umberto Gazi Lippi, Reginaldo Guedes Coelho Lopes

Abstract

Objective To clarify if older pregnant women were more likely to have adverse perinatal outcomes when compared to women at an ideal age to have a child. Methods The groups were divided according to age groups: under 20 years, ≥20 to <40 years, and ≥40 years. Results During the period from January 1st, 2008, to December 31st, 2008, there were 76 births from patients younger than 20 years and 91 births from patients aged 40 years or over. To form a third group with intermediate age, the data of 92 patients aged 20 to 40 years were obtained, totaling 259 patients. Patients aged 40 or older had a statistically greater number of cesarean sections and less use of forceps or normal deliveries (p<0.001). The use of spinal anesthesia was statistically higher among those aged 40 years or more (p<0.001). The frequency of male newborns was statistically higher in older patients, a group with statistically fewer first pregnancies (p<0.001). The frequency of premature newborns was statistically higher in patients aged 40 years or more (p=0.004). Conclusion It is crucial to give priority to aged women, so that prenatal care will be appropriate, minimizing maternal complications and improving perinatal outcomes in this unique group.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 30%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 10 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 33%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 20%
Psychology 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 September 2015.
All research outputs
#11,095,044
of 12,477,729 outputs
Outputs from Einstein (São Paulo)
#100
of 135 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,538
of 232,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Einstein (São Paulo)
#5
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,477,729 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 135 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 232,865 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.