↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Motherhood on Women’s Preferences for Sources of Health Information: A Prospective Cohort Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Community Health, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
Title
Effect of Motherhood on Women’s Preferences for Sources of Health Information: A Prospective Cohort Study
Published in
Journal of Community Health, November 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10900-011-9513-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kamila Plutzer, Marc J. N. C. Keirse

Abstract

To examine what sources of health information are preferred by first-time mothers-to-be and how these preferences change by the time their child reaches school age. Women expecting their first child (n = 649), recruited in a randomized trial of early childhood caries prevention at all five public maternity hospitals in Adelaide, were questioned about their preferences for health information. Their preferences were assessed again 4 and 7 years later. Answers at 7 years were compared with those of a population-based cohort of mothers with a first child of the same age. Parents were listed most frequently as a preferred source of health information during pregnancy (67.8%) followed by health care practitioners (48.8%). By the time the child reached school age, 78% listed health care practitioners as their preferred source compared with 15.5% listing parents, 21.7% friends and relatives, and 13% the Internet. Data from the population-based comparison group of mothers with a first child of similar age mimicked those of mothers enrolled in the trial. Mothers put a lot more trust in information received from health care professionals than they did before their child was born. This can create opportunities for enhancing the effectiveness of community health initiatives.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 2 2%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 81 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 11%
Researcher 8 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 13 15%
Unknown 30 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 23%
Psychology 14 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 30 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 29 August 2019.
All research outputs
#7,330,626
of 24,192,521 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#426
of 1,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,687
of 247,639 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#6
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,192,521 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 247,639 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.