↓ Skip to main content

Fetal membrane imaging and the prediction of preterm birth: a systematic review, current issues, and future directions

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fetal membrane imaging and the prediction of preterm birth: a systematic review, current issues, and future directions
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, December 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12884-016-1176-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vanessa Nunes, Jennifer Cross, John E. Speich, Danielle R. Morgan, Jerome F. Strauss, Ronald M. Ramus

Abstract

Preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM) is the largest identifiable cause of preterm birth. There is currently no good screening test for PPROM in low-risk asymptomatic patients. Our goal was to identify how imaging methods can be utilized for examining the risks for PPROM in asymptomatic patients. This paper is a systematic review of the literature on fetal membrane thickness and its use for the prediction of PPROM. Four key studies are identified and reviewed; two in vitro studies and two in vivo ultrasound studies each using differing methodologies. Additionally reviewed is a study using Optical Coherence Tomography, an emerging technique using near-infrared technology to produce high-resolution images. There is currently insufficient data to determine the association between fetal membrane thickness and PPROM by ultrasound. Fetal membrane thickness could have relevant clinical ramifications for the prediction of PPROM. Suggested improvements in study methodology and design will lead to progress in this area of research, as well as the use of newer technologies. Larger sample sizes, histological comparison, uniform methodologies for data collection, longitudinal study design and expanding data analysis beyond fetal membrane thickness to other properties would expand our knowledge in this field. In addition, transvaginal ultrasound should be utilized to improve resolution, as well as emerging methodologies such as MRI fusion imaging using ultrasound and Shear Wave Elastography.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 13%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 21 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 31%
Engineering 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 23 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 December 2016.
All research outputs
#14,878,745
of 22,912,409 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#2,865
of 4,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,568
of 419,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#65
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,912,409 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,213 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 419,352 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.