↓ Skip to main content

The development of a Simplified, Effective, Labour Monitoring-to-Action (SELMA) tool for Better Outcomes in Labour Difficulty (BOLD): study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
196 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
The development of a Simplified, Effective, Labour Monitoring-to-Action (SELMA) tool for Better Outcomes in Labour Difficulty (BOLD): study protocol
Published in
Reproductive Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12978-015-0029-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

João Paulo Souza, Olufemi T Oladapo, Meghan A Bohren, Kidza Mugerwa, Bukola Fawole, Leonardo Moscovici, Domingos Alves, Gleici Perdona, Livia Oliveira-Ciabati, Joshua P Vogel, Özge Tunçalp, Jim Zhang, Justus Hofmeyr, Rajiv Bahl, A Metin Gülmezoglu, On behalf of the WHO BOLD Research Group

Abstract

The partograph is currently the main tool available to support decision-making of health professionals during labour. However, the rate of appropriate use of the partograph is disappointingly low. Apart from limitations that are associated with partograph use, evidence of positive impact on labour-related health outcomes is lacking. The main goal of this study is to develop a Simplified, Effective, Labour Monitoring-to-Action (SELMA) tool. The primary objectives are: to identify the essential elements of intrapartum monitoring that trigger the decision to use interventions aimed at preventing poor labour outcomes; to develop a simplified, monitoring-to-action algorithm for labour management; and to compare the diagnostic performance of SELMA and partograph algorithms as tools to identify women who are likely to develop poor labour-related outcomes. A prospective cohort study will be conducted in eight health facilities in Nigeria and Uganda (four facilities from each country). All women admitted for vaginal birth will comprise the study population (estimated sample size: 7,812 women). Data will be collected on maternal characteristics on admission, labour events and pregnancy outcomes by trained research assistants at the participating health facilities. Prediction models will be developed to identify women at risk of intrapartum-related perinatal death or morbidity (primary outcomes) throughout the course of labour. These predictions models will be used to assemble a decision-support tool that will be able to suggest the best course of action to avert adverse outcomes during the course of labour. To develop this set of prediction models, we will use up-to-date techniques of prognostic research, including identification of important predictors, assigning of relative weights to each predictor, estimation of the predictive performance of the model through calibration and discrimination, and determination of its potential for application using internal validation techniques. This research offers an opportunity to revisit the theoretical basis of the partograph. It is envisioned that the final product would help providers overcome the challenging tasks of promptly interpreting complex labour information and deriving appropriate clinical actions, and thus increase efficiency of the care process, enhance providers' competence and ultimately improve labour outcomes. Please see related articles ' http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-015-0027-6 ' and ' http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-015-0028-5 '.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 196 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Rwanda 1 <1%
Mali 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 192 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 22%
Researcher 21 11%
Student > Bachelor 17 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 7%
Student > Postgraduate 13 7%
Other 46 23%
Unknown 42 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 59 30%
Nursing and Health Professions 33 17%
Social Sciences 19 10%
Unspecified 7 4%
Psychology 6 3%
Other 26 13%
Unknown 46 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 17 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,051,090
of 26,613,602 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#185
of 1,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,382
of 281,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#7
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,613,602 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 1,627 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 281,187 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.