↓ Skip to main content

Recurrent ectopic pregnancy as a unique clinical sub group: a case control study

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Recurrent ectopic pregnancy as a unique clinical sub group: a case control study
Published in
SpringerPlus, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40064-016-1798-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice Hurrell, Oliver Reeba, Odejinmi Funlayo

Abstract

Women with recurrent ectopic pregnancy (EP) represent a unique cohort of patients in whom diagnostic expertise is paramount. We determined whether recurrent EP is associated with significant differences in patient demographics, clinical presentation, risk factors and surgical findings when compared with primary EP. A retrospective case-control study of all EPs diagnosed from 2003 to 2014, at Whipps Cross University Hospital, London. In the above period 849 EPs were surgically managed (758 primary EPs and 91 recurrent EPs). Recurrent EPs were significantly older than primary EPs (32.2 ± 5.08 vs. 30.5 ± 5.83 years, p < 0.05). They presented at a significantly earlier gestation (5.99 ± 1.08 vs. 6.52 ± 1.81 weeks, p < 0.05) and with a significantly lower primary βHCG (3176 ± 7350 vs. 6243 ± 12,282, p < 0.05). Recurrent EPs were significantly more likely to have a positive history of tubal or pelvic surgery (61.5 % vs. 3.5 %, p < 0.05 and 53.8 vs. 14 %, p < 0.05). At surgery, primary EPs had a significantly greater volume of hemoperitoneum (592 ± 850 vs. 249 ± 391 ml, p < 0.05), whereas recurrent EPs were significantly more likely to have contralateral pathology (31.1 vs. 9.8 %, p < 0.05). Regression analysis showed that the parameters of age, gestational age at presentation, first βHCG level, positive history of previous tubal surgery and previous ectopic pregnancy differ in women at risk of a recurrent EP when compared to women not at risk of a recurrent ectopic (AUC, 0.844). We conclude that recurrent EPs may represent a unique sub-group of patients with EP.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 16%
Other 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 4 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 53%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Unspecified 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 March 2016.
All research outputs
#13,226,218
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#653
of 1,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,179
of 298,620 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#54
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 298,620 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 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.