↓ Skip to main content

What factors influence recruitment to a birth cohort of infants with Down’s syndrome?

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Disease in Childhood, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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
What factors influence recruitment to a birth cohort of infants with Down’s syndrome?
Published in
Archives of Disease in Childhood, March 2018
DOI 10.1136/archdischild-2017-314312
Pubmed ID
Authors

Georgina M Williams, Patricia Neville, Kathleen M Gillespie, Sam D Leary, Julian P Hamilton-Shield, Aidan J Searle

Abstract

To understand how to maximise recruitment of young infants with Down's syndrome (DS) into research through qualitative interviews with parents and care providers. In complex neonatal and genetic conditions such as DS, frequently diagnosed after birth, parents may go through a period of adaptation. These factors need consideration when overcoming barriers to recruitment. Participants, who were drawn from health professionals and volunteers working with families experiencing DS, were recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. Semistructured telephone interviews were completed with nine paediatricians, three research nurses and six family support workers. Five of those interviewed had a child with DS. The interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically. A positive decision to take part in a 'from-birth' cohort study depends on factors such as the child's overall health, parent demographics (educational background and ethnicity), medical interactions that take place with the families (communication) and study logistics. The data suggest that recruitment methods need to take all these factors into consideration. Multiple recruitment methods should be considered including face to face, through parent and support groups, websites and social media. There also needs to be flexibility in the research timings to fit around the needs of the child and parents. Researchers need to be aware of the variable responses elicited by families to a diagnosis of DS for their baby and be sensitive to the child's current medical status. This does not preclude recruitment into studies, but to maximise uptake good communication and flexibility is essential.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 18%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 25 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 15%
Psychology 8 11%
Social Sciences 4 6%
Engineering 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 27 38%
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 19 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Disease in Childhood
#6,312
of 7,355 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,616
of 332,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Disease in Childhood
#111
of 137 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 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 7,355 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 332,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 137 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.