↓ Skip to main content

QF2011: a protocol to study the effects of the Queensland flood on pregnant women, their pregnancies, and their children's early development

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
59 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
288 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
QF2011: a protocol to study the effects of the Queensland flood on pregnant women, their pregnancies, and their children's early development
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12884-015-0539-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne King, Sue Kildea, Marie-Paule Austin, Alain Brunet, Vanessa E Cobham, Paul A Dawson, Mark Harris, Elizabeth M Hurrion, David P Laplante, Brett M McDermott, H David McIntyre, Michael W O’Hara, Norbert Schmitz, Helen Stapleton, Sally K Tracy, Cathy Vaillancourt, Kelsey N Dancause, Sue Kruske, Nicole Reilly, Laura Shoo, Gabrielle Simcock, Anne-Marie Turcotte-Tremblay, Erin Yong Ping

Abstract

Retrospective studies suggest that maternal exposure to a severe stressor during pregnancy increases the fetus' risk for a variety of disorders in adulthood. Animal studies testing the fetal programming hypothesis find that maternal glucocorticoids pass through the placenta and alter fetal brain development, particularly the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. However, there are no prospective studies of pregnant women exposed to a sudden-onset independent stressor that elucidate the biopsychosocial mechanisms responsible for the wide variety of consequences of prenatal stress seen in human offspring. The aim of the QF2011 Queensland Flood Study is to fill this gap, and to test the buffering effects of Midwifery Group Practice, a form of continuity of maternity care. In January 2011 Queensland, Australia had its worst flooding in 30 years. Simultaneously, researchers in Brisbane were collecting psychosocial data on pregnant women for a randomized control trial (the M@NGO Trial) comparing Midwifery Group Practice to standard care. We invited these and other pregnant women to participate in a prospective, longitudinal study of the effects of prenatal maternal stress from the floods on maternal, perinatal and early childhood outcomes. Data collection included assessment of objective hardship and subjective distress from the floods at recruitment and again 12 months post-flood. Biological samples included maternal bloods at 36 weeks pregnancy, umbilical cord, cord blood, and placental tissues at birth. Questionnaires assessing maternal and child outcomes were sent to women at 6 weeks and 6 months postpartum. The protocol includes assessments at 16 months, 2½ and 4 years. Outcomes include maternal psychopathology, and the child's cognitive, behavioral, motor and physical development. Additional biological samples include maternal and child DNA, as well as child testosterone, diurnal and reactive cortisol. This prenatal stress study is the first of its kind, and will fill important gaps in the literature. Analyses will determine the extent to which flood exposure influences the maternal biological stress response which may then affect the maternal-placental-fetal axis at the biological, biochemical, and molecular levels, altering fetal development and influencing outcomes in the offspring. The role of Midwifery Group Practice in moderating effects of maternal stress will be tested.

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 288 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 285 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 50 17%
Student > Bachelor 38 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 13%
Researcher 21 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 5%
Other 48 17%
Unknown 82 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 64 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 38 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 8%
Social Sciences 19 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13 5%
Other 37 13%
Unknown 93 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. 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 05 April 2023.
All research outputs
#899,972
of 24,547,718 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#165
of 4,581 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,083
of 269,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#4
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,547,718 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,581 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 269,180 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 74 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 95% of its contemporaries.