↓ Skip to main content

Adverse pregnancy outcomes in rural Uganda (1996–2013): trends and associated factors from serial cross sectional surveys

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, October 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
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 Mendeley
Title
Adverse pregnancy outcomes in rural Uganda (1996–2013): trends and associated factors from serial cross sectional surveys
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12884-015-0708-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gershim Asiki, Kathy Baisley, Rob Newton, Lena Marions, Janet Seeley, Anatoli Kamali, Lars Smedman

Abstract

Community based evidence on pregnancy outcomes in rural Africa is lacking yet it is needed to guide maternal and child health interventions. We estimated and compared adverse pregnancy outcomes and associated factors in rural south-western Uganda using two survey methods. Within a general population cohort, between 1996 and 2013, women aged 15-49 years were interviewed on their pregnancy outcome in the past 12 months (method 1). During 2012-13, women in the same cohort were interviewed on their lifetime experience of pregnancy outcomes (method 2). Adverse pregnancy outcome was defined as abortions or stillbirths. We used random effects logistic regression for method 1 and negative binomial regression with robust clustered standard errors for method 2 to explore factors associated with adverse outcome. One third of women reported an adverse pregnancy outcome; 10.8 % (abortion = 8.4 %, stillbirth = 2.4 %) by method 1 and 8.5 % (abortion = 7.2 %, stillbirth = 1.3 %) by method 2. Abortion rates were similar (10.8 vs 10.5) per 1000 women and stillbirth rates differed (26.2 vs 13.8) per 1000 births by methods 1 and 2 respectively. Abortion risk increased with age of mother, non-attendance of antenatal care and proximity to the road. Lifetime stillbirth risk increased with age. Abortion and stillbirth risk reduced with increasing parity. Both methods had a high level of agreement in estimating abortion rate but were markedly below national estimates. Stillbirth rate estimated by method 1 was double that estimated by method 2 but method 1 estimate was more consistent with the national estimates. Strategies to improve prospective community level data collection to reduce reporting biases are needed to guide maternal health interventions.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
Unknown 164 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 19%
Researcher 17 10%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 7%
Other 27 16%
Unknown 51 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 19%
Social Sciences 13 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Arts and Humanities 3 2%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 57 35%
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 30 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,349,419
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#2,998
of 4,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,883
of 284,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#63
of 87 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,191 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 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 284,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 87 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.