↓ Skip to main content

Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia

Overview of attention for article published in this source, January 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
facebook
1 Facebook page
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
101 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia
Published by
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, January 2004
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd002006.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gupta, Janesh K, Hofmeyr, G Justus, Smyth, Rebecca MD

Abstract

For centuries, there has been controversy around whether being upright (sitting, birthing stools, chairs, squatting) or lying down have advantages for women delivering their babies.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 3%
India 1 3%
Ireland 1 3%
Unknown 29 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 22%
Student > Bachelor 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Other 3 9%
Lecturer 3 9%
Other 8 25%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 53%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 4 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 24 October 2016.
All research outputs
#353,259
of 11,787,411 outputs
Outputs from this source
#1,222
of 9,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,254
of 100,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from this source
#8
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,787,411 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,203 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 100,698 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.