| Title |
Fathers’ Perceived Reasons for Their Underrepresentation in Child Health Research and Strategies to Increase Their Involvement
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Maternal and Child Health Journal, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10995-016-2157-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kirsten K. Davison, Jo N. Charles, Neha Khandpur, Timothy J. Nelson |
| Abstract |
Purpose Examine fathers' perceived reasons for their lack of inclusion in pediatric research and strategies to increase their participation. Description We conducted expert interviews with researchers and practitioners (N = 13) working with fathers to inform the development of an online survey. The survey-which measured fathers' perceived reasons for their underrepresentation in pediatric research, recommended recruitment venues, and research personnel and study characteristics valued by fathers-was distributed online and in-person to fathers. Assessment Respondents included 303 fathers. Over 80 % of respondents reported that fathers are underrepresented in pediatric research because they have not been asked to participate. Frequently recommended recruitment venues included community sports events (52 %), social service programs (48 %) and the internet (60 %). Compared with white fathers, more non-white fathers recommended public transit (19 % vs. 10 %, p = .02), playgrounds (16 % vs. 6 %, p = .007) and barber shops (34 % vs. 14 %, p < .0001) and fewer recommended doctors' offices (31 % vs. 43 %, p = .046) as recruitment venues. Compared with residential fathers (100 % resident with the target child), more non-residential fathers recommended social services programs (45 % vs. 63 %, p = .03) and public transit (10 % vs. 27 %, p = .001) and fewer recommended the workplace (17 % vs. 40 %, p = .002) as recruitment venues. Study brevity, perceived benefits for fathers and their families, and the credibility of the lead organization were valued by fathers. Conclusion Fathers' participation in pediatric research may increase if researchers explicitly invite father to participate, target father-focused recruitment venues, clearly communicate the benefits of the research for fathers and their families and adopt streamlined study procedures. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 6 | 43% |
| Ireland | 2 | 14% |
| Australia | 1 | 7% |
| Canada | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 64% |
| Scientists | 3 | 21% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 144 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 10% |
| Researcher | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 21 | 15% |
| Unknown | 50 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 28 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 12 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 58 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 26 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,159,864
of 24,983,099 outputs
Outputs from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#97
of 2,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,360
of 374,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#6
of 106 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,983,099 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,140 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 374,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 106 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.