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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Explaining variation in Down’s syndrome screening uptake: comparing the Netherlands with England and Denmark using documentary analysis and expert stakeholder interviews
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Health Services Research, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1472-6963-14-437 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Neeltje MTH Crombag, Ynke E Vellinga, Sandra A Kluijfhout, Louise D Bryant, Pat A Ward, Rita Iedema-Kuiper, Peter CJI Schielen, Jozien M Bensing, Gerard HA Visser, Ann Tabor, Janet Hirst |
| Abstract |
The offer of prenatal Down's syndrome screening is part of routine antenatal care in most of Europe; however screening uptake varies significantly across countries. Although a decision to accept or reject screening is a personal choice, it is unlikely that the widely differing uptake rates across countries can be explained by variation in individual values alone.The aim of this study was to compare Down's syndrome screening policies and programmes in the Netherlands, where uptake is relatively low (<30%) with England and Denmark where uptake is higher (74 and > 90% respectively), in an attempt to explain the observed variation in national uptake rates. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 77 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 19 | 24% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 15% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Psychology | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,407,558
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#3,097
of 7,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,869
of 252,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#59
of 144 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 252,140 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 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 144 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.