Title |
Regional versus general anaesthesia for caesarean section
|
---|---|
Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
|
DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004350.pub3 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Bosede B Afolabi, Foluso EA Lesi |
Abstract |
Regional anaesthesia (RA) and general anaesthesia (GA) are commonly used for caesarean section (CS) and both have advantages and disadvantages. It is important to clarify what type of anaesthesia is more efficacious. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Denmark | 3 | 38% |
Australia | 2 | 25% |
Japan | 1 | 13% |
Unknown | 2 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 7 | 88% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 320 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Germany | 2 | <1% |
Turkey | 1 | <1% |
Rwanda | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 316 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Bachelor | 42 | 13% |
Student > Master | 38 | 12% |
Student > Postgraduate | 35 | 11% |
Researcher | 29 | 9% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 22 | 7% |
Other | 56 | 18% |
Unknown | 98 | 31% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 149 | 47% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 23 | 7% |
Social Sciences | 13 | 4% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 2% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 2% |
Other | 17 | 5% |
Unknown | 106 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 09 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,567,242
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,334
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,051
of 193,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#66
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 193,432 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 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 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 70% of its contemporaries.