↓ Skip to main content

Understanding of Key Obstetric Quality Terminology by Asian and Pacific Islander Subgroups: Implications for Patient Engagement and Health Equity

Overview of attention for article published in Maternal and Child Health Journal, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Understanding of Key Obstetric Quality Terminology by Asian and Pacific Islander Subgroups: Implications for Patient Engagement and Health Equity
Published in
Maternal and Child Health Journal, July 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10995-018-2597-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mary Guo, Michelle Quensell, Ann Chang, Jill Miyamura, Tetine Sentell

Abstract

Introduction Comprehension of healthcare terminology across diverse populations is critical to patient education and engagement. Methods Women in Oahu, Hawai'i with a recent delivery were interviewed about their understanding of ten common obstetric terms. Health literacy was assessed by the rapid estimate of adult literacy in medicine (REALM). Multivariable models predicted total terms comprehended by demographic factors. Results Of 269 participants, self-reported primary race was 20.5% Japanese, 19.0% Native Hawaiian, 19.0% White, 16.7% Filipino, 11.5% other Asian, 9.7% other Pacific Islander, and 3.7% other race/ethnicity; 12.7% had low health literacy. On average, participants understood 6.0 (SD: 2.2) of ten common obstetric terms. Comprehension varied by term, ranging from 97.8% for "Breastfeeding" to 27.5% for "VBAC routinely available." Models showed (1) being Filipino, Japanese, Native Hawaiian, or other Pacific Islander (vs. white); (2) having low (vs. adequate) health literacy; (3) having a high school (vs. a college) degree; and (4) being under 25-years-old (vs. 35 +) were significantly associated with less comprehension. Discussion Participants were unfamiliar with common obstetrics terminology. Comprehension struggles were more common among populations with maternal health disparities, including Asian and Pacific Islander subgroups, and those with low health literacy.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 13%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 19 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 20%
Social Sciences 9 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 15%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 7%
Psychology 4 7%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 18 30%
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 15 July 2018.
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
#290,183
of 330,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Maternal and Child Health Journal
#57
of 59 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 330,173 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 59 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.