↓ Skip to main content

Cord pilot trial: update to randomised trial protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Cord pilot trial: update to randomised trial protocol
Published in
Trials, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-0936-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucy E. Bradshaw, Angela Pushpa-Rajah, Jon Dorling, Eleanor J. Mitchell, Lelia Duley

Abstract

The Cord Pilot Trial aimed to assess the feasibility of conducting a large UK randomised trial to compare the effects of alternative polices for timing of cord clamping (immediate within 20 seconds or deferred after at least 2 minutes) for very preterm birth before 32 weeks gestation. Initial recruitment was from March 2013 to February 2014, phase 2 was from March 2014 to February 2015. This paper updates the pilot trial protocol (Trials 15(1):258, 2014) and presents the changes for phase 2. An electronic randomisation system was introduced at three of the eight pilot sites. For follow-up of children, the Parent Report of Children's Abilities - Revised (PARCA-R) will not be used. For children recruited to the trial during phase 2, follow-up at age 2 years (corrected for gestation at birth) will be by parent completed Ages and Stages Questionnaire (Squire J, Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQ), 2009) alone unless funds can be secured for the additional Bayley Scales of Infant Development III (Bayley N, Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition. (Bayley-III), 2005) assessments. To assess accuracy of the cranial ultrasound diagnosis of intraventricular haemorrhage: (i) quality of the scans will be assessed using the British Society of Paediatric Radiology recommendations, and (ii) scan results will be confirmed by independent adjudication. Within and between adjudicator reliability will be assessed. In addition to the analyses planned to assess feasibility of the full trial based on data from the first year of recruitment, data on compliance and outcomes will be presented by allocated group for all women and babies recruited. ISRCTN21456601 , registered on 28 February 2013.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Student > Master 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 12 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Psychology 3 7%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 13 30%

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 May 2017.
All research outputs
#4,959,797
of 9,787,859 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,579
of 2,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,811
of 238,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#79
of 119 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,787,859 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,641 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 238,306 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 52% 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 is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.