↓ Skip to main content

Why do women invest in pre-pregnancy health and care? A qualitative investigation with women attending maternity services

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (53rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
130 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
Why do women invest in pre-pregnancy health and care? A qualitative investigation with women attending maternity services
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12884-015-0672-3
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Despite the importance attributed to good pre-pregnancy care and its potential to improve pregnancy and child health outcomes, relatively little is known about why women invest in pre-pregnancy health and care. We sought to gain insight into why women invested in pre-pregnancy health and care. We carried out 20 qualitative in-depth interviews with pregnant or recently pregnant women who were drawn from a survey of antenatal clinic attendees in London, UK. Interviewees were purposively sampled to include high and low investors in pre-pregnancy health and care, with variation in age, partnership status, ethnicity and pre-existing medical conditions. Data analysis was conducted using the Framework method. We identified three groups in relation to pre-pregnancy health and care: 1) The "prepared" group, who had high levels of pregnancy planning and mostly positive attitudes to micronutrient supplementation outside of pregnancy, carried out pre-pregnancy activities such as taking folic acid and making changes to diet and lifestyle. 2) The "poor knowledge" group, who also had high levels of pregnancy planning, did not carry out pre-pregnancy activities and described themselves as having poor knowledge. Elsewhere in their interviews they expressed a strong dislike of micronutrient supplementation. 3) The "absent pre-pregnancy period" group, had the lowest levels of pregnancy planning and also expressed anti-supplement views. Even discussing the pre-pregnancy period with this group was difficult as responses to questions quickly shifted to focus on pregnancy itself. Knowledge of folic acid was poor in all groups. Different pre-pregnancy care approaches are likely to be needed for each of the groups. Among the "prepared" group, who were proactive and receptive to health messages, greater availability of information and better response from health professionals could improve the range of pre-pregnancy activities carried out. Among the "poor knowledge" group, better response from health professionals might yield greater uptake of pre-pregnancy information. A different, general health strategy might be more appropriate for the "absent pre-pregnancy period" group. The fact that general attitudes to micronutrient supplementation were closely related to whether or not women invested in pre-pregnancy health and care was an unanticipated finding and warrants further investigation.

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 6 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 130 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 %
United States 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 128 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 11%
Student > Master 14 11%
Researcher 13 10%
Lecturer 7 5%
Other 23 18%
Unknown 43 33%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 2%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 44 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 October 2016.
All research outputs
#15,048,195
of 26,367,306 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#2,677
of 4,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,909
of 288,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#59
of 107 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,367,306 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,985 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 288,413 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 107 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.