↓ Skip to main content

Medical termination of pregnancy in general practice in Australia: a descriptive-interpretive qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 Mendeley
Title
Medical termination of pregnancy in general practice in Australia: a descriptive-interpretive qualitative study
Published in
Reproductive Health, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12978-017-0303-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela J. Dawson, Rachel Nicolls, Deborah Bateson, Anna Doab, Jane Estoesta, Ann Brassil, Elizabeth A. Sullivan

Abstract

Australian Government approval in 2012 for the use of mifepristone and misoprostol for medical termination of pregnancy (MTOP) allows general practitioners (GPs) to provide early gestation abortion in primary care settings. However, uptake of the MTOP provision by GPs appears to be low and the reasons for this have been unclear. This study investigated the provision of and referral for MTOP by GPs. We undertook descriptive-interpretive qualitative research and selected participants for diversity using a matrix. Twenty-eight semi-structured interviews and one focus group (N = 4), were conducted with 32 GPs (8 MTOP providers, 24 non MTOP providers) in New South Wales, Australia. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A framework to examine access to abortion services was used to develop the interview questions and emergent themes identified thematically. Three main themes emerged: scope of practice; MTOP demand, care and referral; and workforce needs. Many GPs saw abortion as beyond the scope of their practice (i.e. a service others provide in specialist private clinics). Some GPs had religious or moral objections; others regarded MTOP provision as complicated and difficult. While some GPs expressed interest in MTOP provision they were concerned about stigma and the impact it may have on perceptions of their practice and the views of colleagues. Despite a reported variance in demand most MTOP providers were busy but felt isolated. Difficulties in referral to a local public hospital in the case of complications or the provision of surgical abortion were noted. Exploring the factors which affect access to MTOP in general practice settings provides insights to assist the future planning and delivery of reproductive health services. This research identifies the need for support to increase the number of MTOP GP providers and for GPs who are currently providing MTOP. Alongside these actions provision in the public sector is required. In addition, formalised referral pathways to the public sector are required to ensure timely care in the case of complications or the provision of surgical options. Leadership and coordination across the health sector is needed to facilitate integrated abortion care particularly for rural and low income women.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 102 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Master 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 7 7%
Other 22 21%
Unknown 28 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 25 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 12%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Psychology 5 5%
Arts and Humanities 4 4%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 34 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 20 May 2020.
All research outputs
#1,661,566
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#150
of 1,417 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,018
of 307,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#3
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,417 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 307,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 93% of its contemporaries.