↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Routine pre-pregnancy health promotion for improving pregnancy outcomes

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
251 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Routine pre-pregnancy health promotion for improving pregnancy outcomes
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2009
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007536.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melissa Whitworth, Therese Dowswell

Abstract

A number of potentially modifiable risk factors are known to be associated with poor pregnancy outcomes. These include smoking, drinking excess alcohol, and poor nutrition. Routine health promotion (encompassing education, advice and general health assessment) in the pre-pregnancy period has been proposed for improving pregnancy outcomes by encouraging behavioural change, or allowing early identification of risk factors. While results from observational studies have been encouraging, this review examines evidence from randomised controlled trials of preconception health promotion.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 251 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 4 2%
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 3 1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Unknown 238 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 54 22%
Researcher 42 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 14%
Student > Bachelor 29 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 8%
Other 41 16%
Unknown 30 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 80 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 39 16%
Psychology 28 11%
Social Sciences 26 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 43 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 02 December 2016.
All research outputs
#4,100,884
of 16,772,563 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6,556
of 11,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,000
of 196,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#128
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,772,563 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,589 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 24.4. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 196,021 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.