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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
From planning to practice: building the national network for the surveillance of severe maternal morbidity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Public Health, May 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2458-11-283 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samira M Haddad, José G Cecatti, Mary A Parpinelli, João P Souza, Maria L Costa, Maria H Sousa, Fernanda G Surita, João L Pinto e Silva, Rodolfo C Pacagnella, Rodrigo S Camargo, Maria V Bahamondes, Vilma Zotareli, Lúcio T Gurgel, Lale Say, Robert C Pattinson, National Network for the Surveillance of Severe Maternal Morbidity Group |
| Abstract |
Improving maternal health is one of the Millennium Development Goals for 2015. Recently some progress has been achieved in reducing mortality. On the other hand, in developed regions, maternal death is a relatively rare event compared to the number of cases of morbidity; hence studying maternal morbidity has become more relevant. Electronic surveillance systems may improve research by facilitating complete data reporting and reducing the time required for data collection and analysis. Therefore the purpose of this study was to describe the methods used in elaborating and implementing the National Network for the Surveillance of Severe Maternal Morbidity in Brazil. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 7 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Kenya | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 79 | 88% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 15 | 17% |
| Researcher | 11 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 24 | 27% |
| Unknown | 16 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 44 | 49% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 20 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 15 April 2013.
All research outputs
#15,270,134
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#11,277
of 14,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,778
of 109,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#139
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,783 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 109,997 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.