↓ Skip to main content

Views of the obstetric profession on non‐invasive prenatal testing in Aotearoa New Zealand: A national survey

Overview of attention for article published in Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
44 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.
Article details
Title
Views of the obstetric profession on non‐invasive prenatal testing in Aotearoa New Zealand: A national survey
Published in
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, July 2017
DOI 10.1111/ajo.12656
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) has been available in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) for approximately four years. It is likely to be introduced into the publicly funded prenatal screening service. To explore obstetrician use and views of NIPT, with consideration to its implementation into screening services for Down syndrome and other conditions. An anonymous online survey combining Likert scales and free text was designed to assess current practice, knowledge, ethical considerations, counselling and views toward public funding of NIPT. The survey was distributed through the New Zealand members of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (n = 418) and responses collected over a two-month period in 2016. There were 134/418 (32.1%) respondents. Current knowledge influenced decisions to offer NIPT (70.3%, 85/121). Confidence in offering NIPT was: 'not at all' (0.8%, 1/128); 'a little' (7.03%, 9/128), 'somewhat' (16.4%, 21/128), 'quite' (40.6%, 52/128) and 'very' (35.2%, 45/128). A total of 83.5% (101/121) stated NIPT should be publicly funded and NIPT capability developed within NZ (89.1%, 106/119). More information and support on the provision of NIPT was called for. There was strong support for public funding of NIPT, and for NIPT capability to be developed in NZ. The call for more training, education and support needs to be actioned in order to facilitate the introduction of NIPT into screening services.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 16%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 2 5%
Other 6 14%
Unknown 18 41%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 8 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 18%
Psychology 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 19 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 27 April 2019.
All research outputs
#1,178,584
of 34,372,222 outputs
Outputs from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#60
of 1,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,784
of 359,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#3
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,372,222 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,911 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 359,337 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 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.