↓ Skip to main content

Effectiveness of a package of postpartum family planning interventions on the uptake of contraceptive methods until twelve months postpartum in Burkina Faso and the Democratic Republic of Congo: the…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, June 2018
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
244 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
Effectiveness of a package of postpartum family planning interventions on the uptake of contraceptive methods until twelve months postpartum in Burkina Faso and the Democratic Republic of Congo: the YAM DAABO study protocol
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12913-018-3199-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nguyen Toan Tran, Mary Eluned Gaffield, Armando Seuc, Sihem Landoulsi, Wambi Maurice E. Yamaego, Asa Cuzin-Kihl, Seni Kouanda, Blandine Thieba, Désiré Mashinda, Rachel Yodi, James Kiarie, Suzanne Reier

Abstract

Postpartum family planning (PPFP) information and services can prevent maternal and child morbidity and mortality in low-resource countries, where high unmet need for PPFP remains despite opportunities offered by routine postnatal care visits. This study aims to identify a package of PPFP interventions and determine its effectiveness on the uptake of contraceptive methods during the first year postpartum. We hypothesize that implementing a PPFP intervention package that is designed to strengthen existing antenatal and postnatal care services will result in an increase in contraceptive use. This is an operational research project using a complex intervention design with three interacting phases. The pre-formative phase aims to map study sites to establish a sampling frame. The formative phase employs a participatory approach using qualitative methodology to identify barriers and catalysts to PPFP uptake to inform the design of a PPFP intervention package. The intervention phase applies a cluster randomized-controlled trial design based at the primary healthcare level, with the experimental group implementing the PPFP package, and the control group implementing usual care. The primary outcome is modern contraceptive method uptake at twelve months postpartum. Qualitative research is embedded in the intervention phase to understand the operational reasons for success or failure of PPFP services. Designing, testing, and scaling-up effective, affordable, and sustainable health interventions in low-resource countries is critical to address the high unmet need for PPFP. Due to socio-cultural complexities surrounding contraceptive use, this research assumes that this is more effectively accomplished by engaging key stakeholders, including adolescents, women, men, key community members, service providers, and policy-makers. At the individual level, knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of women and couples toward PPFP will likely be influenced by a set of low-cost interventions. At the health service delivery level, the implementation of this trial will probably require a shift in behavior and accountability of providers regarding the systematic integration of PPFP into their clinical practice, as well as the optimization of health service organization to ensure the availability of competent staff and contraceptive supplies. Retrospectively registered in the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry ( PACTR201609001784334 , 27 September 2016).

X Demographics

X Demographics

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

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 244 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 49 20%
Researcher 31 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 18 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 7%
Student > Bachelor 15 6%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 88 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 41 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 39 16%
Social Sciences 21 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 2%
Psychology 6 2%
Other 31 13%
Unknown 100 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 21 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,730,953
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,172
of 7,738 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,934
of 328,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#52
of 220 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,738 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 328,264 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 220 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.