↓ Skip to main content

SIMPLE: implementation of recommendations from international evidence-based guidelines on caesarean sections in the Netherlands. Protocol for a controlled before and after study

Overview of attention for article published in Implementation Science, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
SIMPLE: implementation of recommendations from international evidence-based guidelines on caesarean sections in the Netherlands. Protocol for a controlled before and after study
Published in
Implementation Science, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1748-5908-8-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonja Melman, Ellen NC Schoorel, Carmen Dirksen, Anneke Kwee, Luc Smits, Froukje de Boer, Madelaine Jonkers, Mallory D Woiski, Ben Willem J Mol, Johannes PR Doornbos, Harry Visser, Anjoke JM Huisjes, Martina M Porath, Friso MC Delemarre, Simone MI Kuppens, Robert Aardenburg, Ivo MA Van Dooren, Francis PJM Vrouenraets, Frans TH Lim, Gunilla Kleiverda, Paulien CM van der Salm, Karin de Boer, Marko J Sikkema, Jan G Nijhuis, Rosella PMG Hermens, Hubertina CJ Scheepers

Abstract

Caesarean section (CS) rates are rising worldwide. In the Netherlands, the most significant rise is observed in healthy women with a singleton in vertex position between 37 and 42 weeks gestation, whereas it is doubtful whether an improved outcome for the mother or her child was obtained. It can be hypothesized that evidence-based guidelines on CS are not implemented sufficiently. Therefore, the present study has the following objectives: to develop quality indicators on the decision to perform a CS based on key recommendations from national and international guidelines; to use the quality indicators in order to gain insight into actual adherence of Dutch gynaecologists to guideline recommendations on the performance of a CS; to explore barriers and facilitators that have a direct effect on guideline application regarding CS; and to develop, execute, and evaluate a strategy in order to reduce the CS incidence for a similar neonatal outcome (based on the information gathered in the second and third objectives).

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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 116 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 21%
Researcher 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Postgraduate 10 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Other 28 23%
Unknown 21 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 18%
Psychology 6 5%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 27 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 January 2013.
All research outputs
#12,867,570
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from Implementation Science
#1,332
of 1,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,650
of 280,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Implementation Science
#27
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 280,814 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.