| Title |
Biochemical tests of placental function versus ultrasound assessment of fetal size for stillbirth and small‐for‐gestational‐age infants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012245.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alexander EP Heazell, Dexter JL Hayes, Melissa Whitworth, Yemisi Takwoingi, Susan E Bayliss, Clare Davenport |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 36 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 19 | 53% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 6% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 26 | 72% |
| Scientists | 5 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 293 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 293 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 41 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 11% |
| Researcher | 27 | 9% |
| Other | 18 | 6% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 6% |
| Other | 48 | 16% |
| Unknown | 109 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 81 | 28% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 42 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 5% |
| Psychology | 4 | 1% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 1% |
| Other | 27 | 9% |
| Unknown | 120 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 31 August 2021.
All research outputs
#1,550,973
of 25,595,500 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,332
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,886
of 365,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#63
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,595,500 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 365,914 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 182 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 65% of its contemporaries.