↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Interventions in the workplace to support breastfeeding for women in employment

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
242 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Interventions in the workplace to support breastfeeding for women in employment
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2012
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006177.pub3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Omar A Abdulwadud, Mary Elizabeth Snow

Abstract

In recent years there has been a rise in the participation rate of women in employment. Some may become pregnant while in employment and subsequently deliver their babies. Most may decide to return early to work after giving birth for various reasons. Unless these mothers get support from their employers and fellow employees, they might give up breastfeeding when they return to work. As a result, the duration and exclusivity of breastfeeding to the recommended age of the babies would be affected.Workplace environment can play a positive role to promote breastfeeding. For women going back to work, various types of workplace support interventions are available and this should not be ignored by employers. Notably, promoting breastfeeding in a workplace may have benefits for the women, the baby and also the employer.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 238 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 32 13%
Researcher 26 11%
Student > Bachelor 24 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 6%
Other 48 20%
Unknown 79 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 67 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 13%
Social Sciences 26 11%
Psychology 9 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Other 22 9%
Unknown 81 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 01 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,870,117
of 25,457,297 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,993
of 11,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,429
of 193,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#81
of 227 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,457,297 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,499 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 40.0. 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 193,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 227 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 64% of its contemporaries.