↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Prophylactic interventions after delivery of placenta for reducing bleeding during the postnatal period

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
243 Mendeley
Title
Prophylactic interventions after delivery of placenta for reducing bleeding during the postnatal period
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009328.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yukari Yaju, Yaeko Kataoka, Hiromi Eto, Shigeko Horiuchi, Rintaro Mori

Abstract

There are several Cochrane systematic reviews looking at postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) prophylaxis in the third stage of labour and another Cochrane review investigating the timing of prophylactic uterotonics in the third stage of labour (i.e. before or after delivery of the placenta). There are, however, no Cochrane reviews looking at the use of interventions given purely after delivery of the placenta. Ergometrine or methylergometrine are used for the prevention of PPH in the postpartum period (the period after delivery of the infant) after delivery of the placenta in some countries. There are, furthermore, no Cochrane reviews that have so far considered herbal therapies or homeopathic remedies for the prevention of PPH after delivery of the placenta.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 243 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 239 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 14%
Researcher 31 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 11%
Student > Bachelor 26 11%
Student > Postgraduate 16 7%
Other 50 21%
Unknown 60 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 84 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 36 15%
Social Sciences 12 5%
Psychology 11 5%
Unspecified 8 3%
Other 26 11%
Unknown 66 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 25 August 2020.
All research outputs
#3,253,769
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,877
of 11,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,892
of 319,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#119
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 319,945 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 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.