↓ Skip to main content

Urinary incontinence related to perineal muscle strength in the first trimester of pregnancy: cross-sectional study

Overview of attention for article published in Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Urinary incontinence related to perineal muscle strength in the first trimester of pregnancy: cross-sectional study
Published in
Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, August 2014
DOI 10.1590/s0080-623420140000600005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Luiza Gonzalez Riesco, Karina Fernandes-Trevisan, Nathalie Leister, Camila da Silva Cruz, Adriana de Souza Caroci, Miriam Raquel Diniz Zanetti

Abstract

Objective To analyze pelvic floor muscle strength (PFMS), urinary continence and quality of life related to urinary incontinence (UI) of women in the first trimester of pregnancy. Method Cross-sectional study with a sample of 500 women who started prenatal care in a complementary healthcare facility in Guarulhos, state of São Paulo, from 2012 and 2013. Pelvic floor muscle strength was evaluated through perineometry. The pregnant women who presented UI answered the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF). Results It was found that maternal age (OR=1.06; CI95% 1.02-1.11) and prior UI (OR=15.12; 95%CI 8.19-27.92) are the variables that, in tandem, best explain the occurrence of UI at the beginning of pregnancy. The mean score on the ICIQ-SF was 8.2 (SD=3.9), considered a moderate impact on quality of life. Conclusion Older pregnant women with prior UI are more likely to have UI in the first trimester of pregnancy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 30%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Researcher 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 10 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 17 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 12 23%

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 12 December 2018.
All research outputs
#10,666,436
of 14,021,395 outputs
Outputs from Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP
#181
of 353 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,261
of 264,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,021,395 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 353 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.6. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 264,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them