| Title |
Preconception Health Assessment in China, Lebanon and the Philippines: Applicability to Other Countries
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Maternal and Child Health Journal, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10995-013-1334-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mary-Elizabeth Reeve, Lama Charafeddine, Nanbert Zhong, Carmencita D. Padilla, Khalid Yunis, Reem El Rafei, Kawthar Alamiddine, Xinliang Zhao, Xiaoqing Jiang, Christopher P. Howson |
| Abstract |
To test the utility of a preconception checklist tool in identifying preconception health needs of women in three countries; China, Lebanon and the Philippines. An academic medical center within each country participated in the development and testing of a preconception checklist tool, which was administered over a 6 month period to selected target groups in each country. The checklist provided valuable data on the preconception health of 6,530 women. Aggregated data identified common preconception health needs across all countries, including provision of modern contraceptives and adequate immunization coverage; HIV and STI screening; treatment for anemia; and counseling for maintenance of a healthy weight. A preconception checklist tool was found to be useful in distinct cultural settings. The study was a pilot. Future steps include validation and standardization of the checklist, data from which could be used to help shape preconception care policies and implementation strategies. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | 1% |
| Philippines | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 65 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 27% |
| Researcher | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 6% |
| Professor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 16% |
| Unknown | 12 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 33% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 13 | 19% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 24% |
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 11 September 2013.
All research outputs
#15,052,229
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#1,273
of 2,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,142
of 202,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#20
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 202,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.