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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Routine administration of Anti-D: the ethical case for offering pregnant women fetal RHDgenotyping and a review of policy and practice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2393-14-87 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julie Kent, Anne-Maree Farrell, Peter Soothill |
| Abstract |
Since its introduction in the 1960s Anti-D immunoglobulin (Anti-D Ig) has been highly successful in reducing the incidence of haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) and achieving improvements to maternal and fetal health. It has protected women from other invasive interventions during pregnancy and prevented deaths and damage amongst newborns and is a technology which has been adopted worldwide. Currently about one third of pregnant women with the blood group Rhesus D (RhD) negative in the UK (approximately 40,000 women per year in England and Wales), receive antenatal Anti-D Ig in pregnancy when they do not require it because they are carrying a RhD negative fetus. Since 1997, a test using cell free fetal DNA (cffDNA) in maternal blood has been developed to identify the genotype of the fetus and can be used to predict the fetal RhD blood group. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 105 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 12% |
| Researcher | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 28 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 31% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 32 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 19 June 2020.
All research outputs
#1,394,558
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#319
of 4,172 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,136
of 220,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#13
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 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 4,172 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 220,969 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 119 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.