| Title |
UR-CHOICE: can we provide mothers-to-be with information about the risk of future pelvic floor dysfunction?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00192-014-2376-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Don Wilson, James Dornan, Ian Milsom, Robert Freeman |
| Abstract |
Vaginal childbirth is probably the most important factor in the aetiology of pelvic floor dysfunction (PFD) and results in the combination of some or all of the following conditions: urinary (UI) and faecal (FI) incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Up until now, it has been difficult to counsel women antenatally regarding risk factors for subsequent PFD, as there has been little good-quality, long-term information available. We now have moderately robust epidemiological data at 12 and 20 years after delivery and objective pathophysiological data (pudendal nerve trauma and levator defects/avulsion). In this commentary, we propose a scoring system (UR-CHOICE) to predict the risk of future PFD based on several major risk factors (UI before pregnancy, ethnicity, age at birth of first child, body mass index, family history (mother and sister) of PFD and baby's weight and maternal height (if <160 cm and baby >4 kg) that have been identified for subsequent PFD risk. This scoring system will help with counselling for women regarding PFD prevention. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 | 4 | 44% |
| Denmark | 1 | 11% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 11% |
| Vietnam | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 2 | 22% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 44% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 11% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 108 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 14% |
| Other | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 21 | 19% |
| Unknown | 31 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 19% |
| Psychology | 3 | 3% |
| Engineering | 3 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 36 | 33% |
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 08 April 2024.
All research outputs
#1,191,080
of 25,658,541 outputs
Outputs from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#64
of 2,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,217
of 239,179 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Urogynecology Journal & Pelvic Floor Dysfunction
#1
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,658,541 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 2,916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 239,179 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 97% of its contemporaries.