| Title |
Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on maternal and neonatal outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd004074.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susan J McDonald, Philippa Middleton, Therese Dowswell, Peter S Morris |
| Abstract |
Policies for timing of cord clamping vary, with early cord clamping generally carried out in the first 60 seconds after birth, whereas later cord clamping usually involves clamping the umbilical cord more than one minute after the birth or when cord pulsation has ceased. The benefits and potential harms of each policy are debated. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 124 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 20 | 16% |
| United States | 15 | 12% |
| Australia | 10 | 8% |
| Indonesia | 7 | 6% |
| Canada | 6 | 5% |
| Spain | 4 | 3% |
| Mexico | 4 | 3% |
| France | 3 | 2% |
| Sweden | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 5 | 4% |
| Unknown | 48 | 39% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 81 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 25 | 20% |
| Scientists | 14 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 137 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 6% |
| Researcher | 7 | 5% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Unknown | 69 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 25 | 18% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | <1% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 3% |
| Unknown | 69 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 352. 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 01 February 2024.
All research outputs
#93,339
of 25,698,912 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#170
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#534
of 207,309 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5
of 334 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,698,912 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 207,309 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 334 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.