↓ Skip to main content

Women's use of herbal and alternative medicines for preconception care

Overview of attention for article published in Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Women's use of herbal and alternative medicines for preconception care
Published in
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, June 2015
DOI 10.1111/ajo.12324
Pubmed ID
Authors

Safa Charaf, Jonathan L Wardle, David W Sibbritt, Sara Lal, Leonie K Callaway

Abstract

Use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), particularly herbal and alternative medicine supplements, for preconception care and fertility management is becoming increasingly common. To determine the factors associated with the use of CAMs by women for preconception care. 412 women who had visited an antenatal 'first visit' clinic situated at a Brisbane obstetric hospital or had visited a private ultrasound clinic in the same city for the purposes of a routinely indicated ultrasound scan in the first trimester were recruited into the study. Data were collected via a cross-sectional questionnaire. Complementary and alternative medicines (not including multivitamins) were used during preconception by 8.3% of women attending for obstetric care. Approximately half (55.8%) of women taking herbal and alternative medicines ceased these medications on discovery of their pregnancy, though fewer (17.4%) ceased taking multivitamin supplements. Baseline characteristics (age, education and income) are not significantly different between CAM users and those who did not take CAMs preconception. The results of statistical analyses showed that only visiting a practitioner to check for health (OR = 2.00; 95% CI: 1.33, 3.00) and trying to lose weight prior to pregnancy (OR = 1.53; 95% CI: 1.00, 2.36) were the key predictors for women using CAM during preconception. Women do consume CAMs to enhance preconception care to a certain extent, though CAM users remain in the minority. CAM users also tend to cease use once pregnant.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 19%
Student > Bachelor 12 16%
Researcher 10 13%
Lecturer 4 5%
Student > Postgraduate 3 4%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 20 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 4%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 21 28%
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 12 June 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#1,084
of 1,507 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,300
of 280,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#19
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,507 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 280,816 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.