| Title |
Uterotonic agents for first‐line treatment of postpartum haemorrhage: a network meta‐analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, November 2020
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd012754.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
William R Parry Smith, Argyro Papadopoulou, Eleanor Thomas, Aurelio Tobias, Malcolm J Price, Shireen Meher, Zarko Alfirevic, Andrew D Weeks, G Justus Hofmeyr, Ahmet Metin Gülmezoglu, Mariana Widmer, Olufemi T Oladapo, Joshua P Vogel, Fernando Althabe, Arri Coomarasamy, Ioannis D Gallos |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 51 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 | 17 | 33% |
| United States | 5 | 10% |
| India | 2 | 4% |
| Australia | 1 | 2% |
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Israel | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 33 | 65% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 11 | 22% |
| Scientists | 7 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 245 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 245 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 27 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 8% |
| Researcher | 18 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 7% |
| Other | 34 | 14% |
| Unknown | 110 | 45% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 60 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 27 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 19 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 7 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 15 | 6% |
| Unknown | 113 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 14 October 2022.
All research outputs
#939,789
of 25,744,802 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,827
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,658
of 528,564 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#37
of 187 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,744,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 528,564 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 187 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.