↓ Skip to main content

Implementation of Child Death Review in the Netherlands: results of a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Implementation of Child Death Review in the Netherlands: results of a pilot study
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12913-016-1500-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sandra Gijzen, Michaëla I. Hilhorst, Monique P. L’Hoir, Magda M. Boere-Boonekamp, Ariana Need

Abstract

Child mortality in the Netherlands declined gradually in the past decades. In total 1130 children and youth aged 0 to 19 years died in 2014 (i.e. 29.4 per 100,000 live births). A better understanding of the background and the circumstances surrounding the death of children as well as the manner and cause of death may lead to preventive measures. Child Death Review (CDR) is a method to systematically analyze child deaths by a multidisciplinary team to identify avoidable factors that may have contributed to the death and to give directions for prevention. CDR could be an addition to further reduce avoidable child deaths in the Netherlands. The purpose of this study is to explore the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) of the pilot-implementation of CDR in a Dutch region. The results are translated in recommendations for future implementation of the CDR method in the Netherlands. Children who lived in the pilot region and died aged 29 days after birth until 2 years were, after parental consent, included for reviewing by a regional CDR team. Eighteen logs and seven transcribed records of CDR meetings concerning 6 deceased children were analyzed using Atlas ti. The SWOT framework was used to identify important themes. The most important strengths identified were the expertise of and cooperation within the CDR team and the available materials. An important weakness was the poor cooperation of some professional groups. The fact that parents and professionals endorse the objective of CDR was an important opportunity. The lack of statutory basis was a threat. Many obstacles need to be taken away before large-scale implementation of CDR in the Netherlands becomes possible. The most important precondition for implementation is the acceptance among professionals and the statutory basis of the CDR method.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 7 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 35%
Psychology 6 18%
Social Sciences 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 8 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,475,674
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#4,633
of 7,651 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,871
of 354,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#106
of 178 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,651 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 354,871 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 178 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.