↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Transplacental versus direct fetal corticosteroid treatment for accelerating fetal lung maturation where there is a risk of preterm birth

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
198 Mendeley
Title
Transplacental versus direct fetal corticosteroid treatment for accelerating fetal lung maturation where there is a risk of preterm birth
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, June 2018
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd008981.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Debby P Utama, Caroline A Crowther

Abstract

Despite major advances in medical technology, the incidence of preterm birth remains high. The use of antenatal corticosteroid administered transplacentally, by intramuscular injection to women at risk of preterm birth, has reduced the incidence of respiratory distress syndrome and increased the survival rates of preterm infants. However, this intervention also comes with its own risks and side effects. Animal studies and early studies in pregnant women at risk of preterm birth have reported the use of an alternative route of administration, by direct intramuscular injection of corticosteroid into the fetus under ultrasound guidance, in an attempt to minimise the side-effect profile. Direct fetal corticosteroid administration may have benefits over maternal administration in terms of safety and efficacy. To assess if different routes of corticosteroid administration (maternal versus direct fetal) have effects on health outcomes for women and their babies. We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (25 October 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (25 October 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies. Randomised controlled trials comparing maternal with direct fetal routes of antenatal corticosteroid administration in women at risk of preterm birth. The two review authors independently assessed study eligibility. In future updates of this review, at least two review authors will extract data and assess the risks of bias in included studies. We will also assess the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We did not identify any eligible randomised controlled trials to include in this review. The available clinical studies carried out so far on animals and human have shown that direct intramuscular injection of corticosteroid into the fetus under ultrasound guidance is feasible, but data on health outcomes are lacking. Uncertainty therefore persists as to which method could provide better efficacy and safety. Randomised controlled trials are required focusing on the benefits and harms of transplacental versus direct fetal corticosteroid treatment. Until the uncertainties have been addressed, it is advisable to stay with the current standard of antenatal transplacental maternally-administered corticosteroid treatment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 198 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 198 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 13%
Student > Master 20 10%
Researcher 16 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 8%
Student > Postgraduate 10 5%
Other 23 12%
Unknown 87 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 48 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 9%
Social Sciences 10 5%
Psychology 5 3%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 15 8%
Unknown 99 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 July 2018.
All research outputs
#8,652,566
of 25,806,763 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#9,705
of 13,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,990
of 343,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#160
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,763 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,140 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 343,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.