↓ Skip to main content

Fertility awareness‐based methods for contraception

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Fertility awareness‐based methods for contraception
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2004
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004860.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Grimes DA, Gallo MF, Grigorieva V, Nanda K, Schulz KF, Grimes, David A, Gallo, Maria F, Halpern, Vera, Nanda, Kavita, Schulz, Kenneth F, Lopez, Laureen M

Abstract

"Fertility awareness-based methods" (FAB) of family planning "involve identification of the fertile days of the menstrual cycle, whether by observing fertility signs such as cervical secretions and basal body temperature, or by monitoring cycle days. FAB methods can be used in combination with abstinence or barrier methods during the fertile time" (WHO 2000). Several names have been used to describe this approach to contraception, including "rhythm," "natural family planning" and "periodic abstinence." Fertility awareness-based methods can be used with abstinence from sexual intercourse. Alternatively, they can be used with barrier contraceptives or withdrawal during presumed fertile times.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russian Federation 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 58 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Researcher 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 1 2%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 44%
Social Sciences 9 14%
Unspecified 8 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 1 2%

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 02 May 2013.
All research outputs
#3,453,652
of 12,100,779 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,261
of 7,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,816
of 275,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#134
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,100,779 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,978 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 275,470 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.