↓ Skip to main content

Are participants in face-to-face and internet support groups the same? Comparison of demographics and depression levels among women bereaved by stillbirth

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Women's Mental Health, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 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.
Title
Are participants in face-to-face and internet support groups the same? Comparison of demographics and depression levels among women bereaved by stillbirth
Published in
Archives of Women's Mental Health, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00737-016-0657-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katherine J. Gold, Margaret M. Normandin, Martha E. Boggs

Abstract

Support groups can help individuals cope with difficult health situations but have been understudied for women with perinatal bereavement. An early study suggested those using internet support groups had high rates of positive depression screens, raising the question whether these users were more symptomatic than those in similar face-to-face support groups. We therefore conducted two convenience sample surveys of women bereaved by perinatal loss, one looking at use of online support groups and the other in-person support groups. The surveys identified demographics, use of peer support, potential confounders, and current depression symptoms using the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). Four hundred sixteen women from 18 internet groups and 60 women from 13 in-person groups met inclusion criteria. Participants in both groups were predominantly Caucasian, highly educated, and had private insurance. Severe depression symptoms were similar in the two groups despite the different modalities. Women in both face-to-face or internet groups for pregnancy and perinatal loss demonstrated similar scores on depression screens. Women of color, poor, and less-educated women were starkly underrepresented in both types of groups, raising questions about knowledge of support options, barriers to use, preferences for bereavement support, and optimization of groups for a broader population.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 109 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 11%
Researcher 5 5%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 19 17%
Unknown 37 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 27 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 12%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 10%
Social Sciences 8 7%
Unspecified 4 4%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 38 35%
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 29 January 2018.
All research outputs
#12,926,029
of 23,302,246 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Women's Mental Health
#568
of 939 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,635
of 341,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Women's Mental Health
#8
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,302,246 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 939 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 341,822 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.