The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 99 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.
| Title |
Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping and other strategies to influence placental transfusion at preterm birth on maternal and infant outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2019
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd003248.pub4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Heike Rabe, Gillian ML Gyte, José L Díaz‐Rossello, Lelia Duley |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 10 | 10% |
| Spain | 6 | 6% |
| Mexico | 3 | 3% |
| United States | 3 | 3% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 2 | 2% |
| Singapore | 1 | 1% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 10 | 10% |
| Unknown | 59 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 76 | 77% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 11 | 11% |
| Scientists | 11 | 11% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 643 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 637 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 58 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 55 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 53 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 45 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 40 | 6% |
| Other | 110 | 17% |
| Unknown | 282 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 186 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 76 | 12% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 2% |
| Psychology | 9 | 1% |
| Other | 45 | 7% |
| Unknown | 299 | 47% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 135. 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 01 February 2024.
All research outputs
#326,476
of 26,368,346 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#532
of 13,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,487
of 356,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,368,346 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 356,052 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.