↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Pulse oximetry screening: a review of diagnosing critical congenital heart disease in newborns

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
Title
Pulse oximetry screening: a review of diagnosing critical congenital heart disease in newborns
Published in
Medical Devices : Evidence and Research, July 2016
DOI 10.2147/mder.s102146
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melissa S Engel, Lazaros K Kochilas

Abstract

Congenital heart disease (CHD) is one of the most common birth defects, with an incidence of nine out of every 1,000 live births. The mortality of infants with CHD has decreased over the past 3 decades, but significant morbidity and mortality continue to occur if not diagnosed shortly after birth. Pulse oximetry was recommended as a screening tool to detect critical CHD in 2011 by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Heart Association. Pulse oximetry is a tool to measure oxygen saturation, and based on the presence of hypoxemia, many cardiac lesions are detected. Due to its ease of application to the patient, providing results in a timely manner and without the need for calibrating the sensor probe, pulse oximetry offers many advantages as a screening tool. However, pulse oximetry has also important limitations of which physicians should be aware to be able to assess the significance of the pulse oximetry measurement for a given patient. This review aims to highlight the benefits and shortcomings of pulse oximetry within the context of screening for critical CHD and suggests future avenues to cover existing gaps in current practices.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 121 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 21%
Other 13 11%
Student > Master 11 9%
Researcher 9 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 37 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 7%
Computer Science 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Engineering 3 2%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 40 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 11 October 2022.
All research outputs
#8,296,727
of 25,457,858 outputs
Outputs from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#120
of 314 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,699
of 367,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Devices : Evidence and Research
#8
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,858 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 314 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 367,395 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 50% of its contemporaries.