↓ Skip to main content

Patterns of Internet Use by Pregnant Women, and Reliability of Pregnancy-Related Searches

Overview of attention for article published in Maternal and Child Health Journal, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
72 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
Title
Patterns of Internet Use by Pregnant Women, and Reliability of Pregnancy-Related Searches
Published in
Maternal and Child Health Journal, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10995-016-2075-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deepa Maheswari Narasimhulu, Scarlett Karakash, Jeremy Weedon, Howard Minkoff

Abstract

Objective To assess patterns of e-health use in pregnancy in an underserved racially diverse inner-city population, and to assess the accuracy of pregnancy-related information obtained from the Internet. Methods A cross sectional study of 503 pregnant/postpartum women belonging to an underserved racially diverse inner-city population who completed a survey regarding e-health use. To assess accuracy, four independent expert-reviewers rated the first 10 webpages on Google searches for each of five questions based upon those in ACOG bulletins. Results 70.8 % of pregnant/postpartum women belonging to an underserved racially diverse inner-city population were e-health users. E-health users were younger (mean age 29.4 vs. 31.2, P = 0.009), more likely to be nulliparous (50.3 vs. 21.3 %, P < 0.001), have English as their primary language (62.3 vs. 49.1 %, P = 0.014) and have a college/graduate education (78 vs. 26.6 %, P < 0.001). While 60 % of these women said e-health influenced decision making, only 71.3 % of them discussed their searches with their provider. Expert reviewers determined that the online information was fairly accurate (mean score: +1.48 to +4.33 on a scale of -5 to +5) but not uniformly accurate, and there was at least one webpage with inaccurate information for every question. Conclusions for practice Pregnant women frequently use e-health resources but do not routinely share their findings with their providers. Most, but not all, information obtained is accurate. Therefore it is important for providers to discuss their patients' use, and help to guide them to reliable information.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Student > Master 12 12%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 36 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Psychology 8 8%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Engineering 5 5%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 40 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 January 2018.
All research outputs
#19,436,760
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#1,694
of 2,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,450
of 371,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#88
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,039 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 371,130 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.