| Title |
Cervical pessary for preventing preterm birth
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007873.pub3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hany Abdel-Aleem, Omar M Shaaban, Mahmoud A Abdel-Aleem |
| Abstract |
Preterm birth is a major health problem and contributes to more than 50% of the overall perinatal mortality. Preterm birth has multiple risk factors including cervical incompetence and multiple pregnancy. Different management strategies have been tried to prevent preterm birth, including cervical cerclage. Cervical cerclage is an invasive technique that needs anaesthesia and may be associated with complications. Moreover, there is still controversy regarding the efficacy and the group of patients that could benefit from this operation. Cervical pessary has been tried as a simple, non-invasive alternative that might replace the above invasive cervical stitch operation to prevent preterm birth. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 214 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 208 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 9% |
| Researcher | 18 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 5% |
| Other | 38 | 18% |
| Unknown | 60 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 94 | 44% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Psychology | 5 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 23 | 11% |
| Unknown | 64 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 26 April 2022.
All research outputs
#4,497,614
of 22,719,618 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,847
of 12,314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,723
of 194,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#151
of 277 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,719,618 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 194,707 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 277 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.