↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Cephalic version by postural management for breech presentation

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Cephalic version by postural management for breech presentation
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd000051.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

G Justus Hofmeyr, Regina Kulier

Abstract

Babies with breech presentation (bottom first) are at increased risk of complications during birth, and are often delivered by caesarean section. The chance of breech presentation persisting at the time of delivery, and the risk of caesarean section, can be reduced by external cephalic version (ECV - turning the baby by manual manipulation through the mother's abdomen). It is also possible that maternal posture may influence fetal position. Many postural techniques have been used to promote cephalic version.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 110 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 29 26%
Student > Master 19 17%
Researcher 9 8%
Other 8 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 7%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 51%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 13%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Psychology 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 24 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 19 February 2021.
All research outputs
#1,412,585
of 17,994,434 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,520
of 11,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,429
of 223,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#87
of 253 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,994,434 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 223,787 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 253 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 66% of its contemporaries.