↓ Skip to main content

A mixed methods review to develop and confirm a framework for assessing midwifery practice in perinatal mental health

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Advanced Nursing, August 2018
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
35 X users

Readers on

mendeley
94 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
A mixed methods review to develop and confirm a framework for assessing midwifery practice in perinatal mental health
Published in
Journal of Advanced Nursing, August 2018
DOI 10.1111/jan.13786
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To ascertain whether a new framework examining midwifery practice in perinatal mental health is supported by the research literature. The identification and care of women with perinatal mental health problems is increasingly considered part of midwifery practice. Research suggests that many midwives lack knowledge, skills and confidence. It would be useful to be able to determine barriers and facilitators to effective clinical practice. The authors propose a framework comprising five potentially measurable domains which have an impact on midwives' ability to identify, assess and care for women with perinatal mental health problems. This mixed-methods review uses an innovative qualitative convergent design based on framework synthesis. Relevant electronic databases were searched for the period from January 2007 - December 2016; 33 studies from nine countries met the inclusion criteria. Study quality was assessed using critical appraisal tools. Study findings were mapped onto the five domains of the framework: knowledge, confidence, attitudes, illness perception and infrastructure. Findings were then synthesized for each domain. All five domains are substantially represented in the literature, thus supporting the proposed framework. Several sub-domains and relationships between domains were identified. Varying levels of knowledge, confidence, attitudes and illness perceptions were found; evidence suggests that midwives benefit from further training within these domains. Features of organisational infrastructure act as barriers or facilitators to effective care; these need to be addressed at organisational level. The proposed framework was confirmed and can be used to inform practice, policy and research. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 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 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 94 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 12%
Student > Master 11 12%
Lecturer 6 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 5%
Researcher 3 3%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 50 53%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 25 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 15%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Computer Science 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 46 49%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. 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 08 November 2018.
All research outputs
#2,219,225
of 32,810,023 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Advanced Nursing
#740
of 7,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,061
of 363,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Advanced Nursing
#25
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,810,023 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,283 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 363,001 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.