↓ Skip to main content

Ancillary benefits of antenatal ultrasound: an association between the introduction of a low-cost ultrasound program and an increase in the numbers of women receiving recommended antenatal treatments

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
112 Mendeley
Title
Ancillary benefits of antenatal ultrasound: an association between the introduction of a low-cost ultrasound program and an increase in the numbers of women receiving recommended antenatal treatments
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12884-014-0424-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew B Ross, Kristen K DeStigter, Anastasia Coutinho, Sonia Souza, Anthony Mwatha, Alphonsus Matovu, Michael Grace Kawooya, Ssembatya Renny

Abstract

BackgroundIn June of 2010, an antenatal ultrasound program was introduced to perform basic screening examinations at a health care clinic in rural Uganda. The impact of the program on the existing antenatal care infrastructure including the proportion and number of women receiving recommended antenatal care at clinic visits was unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between the advent of the ultrasound program and the proportion of women receiving recommended antenatal interventions at their clinic visits. Change in the absolute numbers of antenatal services provided was also assessed.MethodsRecords at the Nawanyago clinic were reviewed to determine the total numbers of women receiving specific interventions before and after the advent of the ultrasound program including HIV testing, intermittent preventive therapy for malaria, presumptive anti-parasitic treatment, and provision of iron and folate for anemia. The rate at which these interventions were provided (number of interventions per clinic visit) was also assessed. The differences in absolute numbers of antenatal interventions before and after the introduction of the ultrasound program were assessed using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Differences in intervention rate were assessed using negative binomial regression modeling.ResultsThe mean monthly numbers of women receiving each of these interventions increased significantly with the greatest increase seen in numbers of women receiving anemia and deworming treatments at +113% and +102% respectively (p¿<¿0.001). The intervention rate increased for anemia treatment, deworming treatment, and 2nd dose of intermittent preventive therapy for malaria. A slight decrease in intervention rate was observed for 1st dose of malaria treatment with a rate ratio of 0.88 (0.79 - 0.98, 95% CI). Intervention rate for HIV testing was not significantly changed.ConclusionThe introduction of a low-cost antenatal ultrasound program at a health care clinic in rural Uganda was associated with increases in the number of women receiving specific recommended antenatal care interventions. Effect on intervention rates was mixed but showed an overall increase. The use of ultrasound in this context may provide a benefit to the maternal and neonatal health of the community.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 112 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 111 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 18%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Unspecified 6 5%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 29 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 36 32%
Social Sciences 9 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Design 4 4%
Engineering 3 3%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 36 32%
Attention Score in Context

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 06 January 2015.
All research outputs
#18,388,295
of 22,776,824 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#3,460
of 4,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,852
of 353,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#43
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,776,824 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 353,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.