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 |
A physiologic approach to cord clamping: Clinical issues
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40748-015-0022-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susan Niermeyer |
| Abstract |
Recent experimental physiology data and a large, population-based observational study have changed umbilical cord clamping from a strictly time-based construct to a more complex equilibrium involving circulatory changes and the onset of respirations in the newly born infant. However, available evidence is not yet sufficient to optimize the management of umbilical cord clamping. Current guidelines vary in their recommendations and lack advice for clinicians who face practical dilemmas in the delivery room. This review examines the evidence around physiological outcomes of delayed cord clamping and cord milking vs. immediate cord clamping. Gaps in the existing evidence are highlighted, including the optimal time to clamp the cord and the interventions that should be performed before clamping in infants who fail to establish spontaneous respirations or are severely asphyxiated, as well as those who breathe spontaneously. Behavioral and technological changes informed by further research are needed to promote adoption and safe practice of physiologic cord clamping. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 58 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Researcher | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 25% |
| Unknown | 12 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 24 | 41% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 20% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 2% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 28 July 2022.
All research outputs
#6,099,722
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology
#34
of 83 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,033
of 267,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal Health, Neonatology and Perinatology
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 83 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 267,916 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them