↓ Skip to main content

The Place of Faith for Consultant Obstetricians Following Stillbirth: A Qualitative Exploratory Study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Religion & Health, June 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 (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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 Place of Faith for Consultant Obstetricians Following Stillbirth: A Qualitative Exploratory Study
Published in
Journal of Religion & Health, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10943-015-0077-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Nuzum, Sarah Meaney, Keelin O’Donoghue

Abstract

Stillbirth remains among the most challenging areas in obstetric practice. The objectives of this study were to explore the impact of stillbirth on the faith of obstetricians. Semi-structured in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with obstetricians focusing on the impact of stillbirth on their faith. Data were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Stillbirth was identified as one of the most difficult experiences, and most consultants were unable to engage with their personal beliefs when dealing with death at work. The major study themes were conflict of personal faith and incongruence between personal faith and professional practice. This study highlights a gap in how obstetricians see their own faith and feeling able to respond to the faith needs of bereaved parents. Participating obstetricians did not demonstrate that spirituality was an integrated part of their professional life.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 46 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Master 7 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 15%
Psychology 4 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 13 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 07 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,160,404
of 17,355,315 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Religion & Health
#102
of 916 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,454
of 237,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Religion & Health
#1
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,355,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 916 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. 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 237,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.