| Title |
Increasing the Use of Comparative Quality Information in Maternity Care: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Medical Care Research and Review, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1177/1077558717712290 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maureen Maurer, Kristin L. Carman, Manshu Yang, Kirsten Firminger, Judith Hibbard |
| Abstract |
This randomized controlled trial tested an intervention to increase uptake of hospital-level maternity care quality reports among 245 pregnant women in North Carolina (123 treatment; 122 control). The intervention included three enhancements to the quality report offered to the control: (a) biweekly text messages or e-mails directing women to the website, (b) videos and materials describing the relevance of quality measures to pregnant women's interests, and (c) tools to support discussions with clinicians. Compared with controls, intervention participants were significantly more likely to visit the website and report adopting behaviors to inform care, such as thinking through preferences, talking with their doctor, or creating a birth plan. Reports designed to put quality information into the larger context of what consumers want and need to know, along with targeted and timely communications, can increase consumer use of quality information and prompt them to talk with providers about care preferences and evidence-based practices. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 8 | 80% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 1 | 10% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 70% |
| Scientists | 2 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 51 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 18% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Librarian | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 14% |
| Unknown | 14 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 14 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 25% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 15 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 09 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,948,206
of 24,225,722 outputs
Outputs from Medical Care Research and Review
#126
of 690 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,777
of 319,566 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Care Research and Review
#2
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,225,722 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 690 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 319,566 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.