| Title |
Comparison of Prospective and Retrospective Measurements of Frequency of Sexual Intercourse
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Maternal and Child Health Journal, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10995-013-1396-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Larissa R. Brunner Huber, Jordan E. Lyerly, Ashley M. Young, Jacek Dmochowski, Tara M. Vick, Delia Scholes |
| Abstract |
Measurements of sexual intercourse frequency are informative for research on pregnancy, contraception, and the transmission of sexually transmitted infections; however, efficiently collecting data on this sensitive topic is complex. The purpose of this study was to determine whether retrospective recall of sexual intercourse frequency was consistent with information obtained through the use of prospective daily diary methods corresponding to the same time period in a diverse sample of women. A total of 185 women participated in a longitudinal, prospective cohort study of oral contraceptive users and 98 of these women provided complete information on sexual intercourse frequency on diaries (prospective) and postcards (retrospective). Linear mixed models were used to test for variation in response within categories of demographic and other variables. The mean number of days women had sexual intercourse per week was 1.5 days using prospective diary information versus 2.0 days when using 3-month retrospective recall (p < 0.001). Mean differences for the various sociodemographic subgroups were positive for all groups indicating that women consistently reported a higher frequency of sexual intercourse on the retrospective postcards than they recorded on their prospective diaries; however, these mean differences did not vary significantly. If confirmed in other samples, the use of retrospective methods may be adequate to accurately collect data on sexual intercourse frequency-and may be preferable. Using only retrospective measurements could decrease study costs, the burden to participants, and have a higher response rate. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 29% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 14% |
| Psychology | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
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 21 July 2014.
All research outputs
#21,415,544
of 23,906,448 outputs
Outputs from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#1,874
of 2,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,761
of 314,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#41
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,906,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 314,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.