↓ Skip to main content

This baby is not for turning: Women’s experiences of attempted external cephalic version

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
This baby is not for turning: Women’s experiences of attempted external cephalic version
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12884-016-1038-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. P. Watts, K. Petrovska, A. Bisits, C. Catling, C. S. E. Homer

Abstract

Existing studies regarding women's experiences surrounding an External Cephalic Version (ECV) report on women who have a persistent breech post ECV and give birth by caesarean section, or on women who had successful ECVs and plan for a vaginal birth. There is a paucity of understanding about the experience of women who attempt an ECV then plan a vaginal breech birth when their baby remains breech. The aim of this study was to examine women's experience of an ECV which resulted in a persistent breech presentation. A qualitative descriptive exploratory design was undertaken. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted and analysed thematically. Twenty two (n = 22) women who attempted an ECV and subsequently planned a vaginal breech birth participated. Twelve women had a vaginal breech birth (55 %) and 10 (45 %) gave birth by caesarean section. In relation to the ECV, there were five main themes identified: 'seeking an alternative', 'needing information', 'recounting the ECV experience', 'reacting to the unsuccessful ECV' and, 'reflecting on the value of an ECV'. ECV should form part of a range of options provided to women, rather than a default procedure for management of the term breech. For motivated women who fit the safe criteria for vaginal breech birth, not being subjected to a painful experience (ECV) may be optimal. Women should be supported to access services that support vaginal breech birth if this is their choice, and continuity of care should be standard practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Other 5 16%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Other 7 22%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 19%
Computer Science 1 3%
Materials Science 1 3%
Design 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 18 September 2016.
All research outputs
#2,170,923
of 12,607,969 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#676
of 2,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,381
of 260,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,607,969 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,305 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 260,748 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them