| Title |
Planned hospital birth versus planned home birth
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd000352.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ole Olsen, Jette A Clausen |
| Abstract |
Observational studies of increasingly better quality and in different settings suggest that planned home birth in many places can be as safe as planned hospital birth and with less intervention and fewer complications. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 1998. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 192 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 States | 37 | 19% |
| Spain | 20 | 10% |
| United Kingdom | 14 | 7% |
| Canada | 12 | 6% |
| Netherlands | 6 | 3% |
| Australia | 3 | 2% |
| Chile | 2 | 1% |
| Finland | 2 | 1% |
| Colombia | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 15 | 8% |
| Unknown | 79 | 41% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 155 | 81% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 23 | 12% |
| Scientists | 10 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 4 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 389 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Tanzania, United Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 380 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 83 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 62 | 16% |
| Researcher | 40 | 10% |
| Other | 30 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 8% |
| Other | 70 | 18% |
| Unknown | 74 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 140 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 81 | 21% |
| Social Sciences | 22 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 4% |
| Psychology | 16 | 4% |
| Other | 28 | 7% |
| Unknown | 86 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 310. 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 15 March 2024.
All research outputs
#111,336
of 25,628,260 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#207
of 13,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#477
of 187,834 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 231 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,628,260 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,152 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 187,834 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 231 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 97% of its contemporaries.