↓ Skip to main content

Regional variation in postabortion initiation of long‐acting reversible contraception in New Zealand

Overview of attention for article published in Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Regional variation in postabortion initiation of long‐acting reversible contraception in New Zealand
Published in
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, April 2016
DOI 10.1111/ajo.12463
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

To determine whether there is regional variation in the immediate postabortion initiation of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) in New Zealand. Retrospective analysis of nationally collected data on receipt of intrauterine and implantable contraception at the time of an abortion, together with demographic characteristics and region of residence for the year 2013. Postabortion LARC initiation varied significantly between the 16 regions of New Zealand, ranging from 32% (95% CI 23.2-42) to 61.4% (95% CI 53.3-69). Implant use ranged from 6.8% to 32.7% across regions, and intrauterine method use ranged from 21.4% to 54.7%. Regional variation in total LARC uptake was most marked for under 20-year-olds (20.3% to 70.9%). The ratio of intrauterine to implant users ranged from 0.7 to 4.1 across regions, with intrauterine methods prescribed two and a half times more frequently nationwide. These regional differences in postabortion LARC initiation suggest there are between-clinic differences in prescribing. Reasons for these differences need to be examined to identify and address any barriers faced by clinics in the routine provision of postabortion LARC. Equitable access to LARC at the time of an abortion is needed throughout New Zealand to assist women in the prevention of future unintended pregnancies.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 32 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 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 22%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 April 2016.
All research outputs
#27,727,448
of 34,361,833 outputs
Outputs from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#1,586
of 1,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,154
of 340,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
#9
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,361,833 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 9.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 340,066 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.