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 |
Evaluation of an international educational programme for health care professionals on best practice in the management of a perinatal death: IMproving Perinatal mortality Review and Outcomes Via Education (IMPROVE)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12884-016-1173-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul A. Gardiner, Alison L. Kent, Viviana Rodriguez, Aleena M. Wojcieszek, David Ellwood, Adrienne Gordon, Patricia A. Wilson, Diana M. Bond, Adrian Charles, Susan Arbuckle, Glenn J. Gardener, Jeremy J. Oats, Jan Jaap Erwich, Fleurisca J. Korteweg, T. H. Nguyen Duc, Susannah Hopkins Leisher, Kamal Kishore, Robert M. Silver, Alexander E. Heazell, Claire Storey, Vicki Flenady |
| Abstract |
Stillbirths and neonatal deaths are devastating events for both parents and clinicians and are global public health concerns. Careful clinical management after these deaths is required, including appropriate investigation and assessment to determine cause (s) to prevent future losses, and to improve bereavement care for families. An educational programme for health care professionals working in maternal and child health has been designed to address these needs according to the Perinatal Society of Australia and New Zealand Guideline for Perinatal Mortality: IMproving Perinatal mortality Review and Outcomes Via Education (IMPROVE). The programme has a major focus on stillbirth and is delivered as six interactive skills-based stations. We aimed to determine participants' pre- and post-programme knowledge of and confidence in the management of perinatal deaths, along with satisfaction with the programme. We also aimed to determine suitability for international use. The IMPROVE programme was delivered to health professionals in maternity hospitals in all seven Australian states and territories and modified for use internationally with piloting in Vietnam, Fiji, and the Netherlands (with the assistance of the International Stillbirth Alliance, ISA). Modifications were made to programme materials in consultation with local teams and included translation for the Vietnam programme. Participants completed pre- and post-programme evaluation questionnaires on knowledge and confidence on six key components of perinatal death management as well as a satisfaction questionnaire. Over the period May 2012 to May 2015, 30 IMPROVE workshops were conducted, including 26 with 758 participants in Australia and four with 136 participants internationally. Evaluations showed a significant improvement between pre- and post-programme knowledge and confidence in all six stations and overall, and a high degree of satisfaction in all settings. The IMPROVE programme has been well received in Australia and in three different international settings and is now being made available through ISA. Future research is required to determine whether the immediate improvements in knowledge are sustained with less causes of death being classified as unknown, changes in clinical practice and improvement in parents' experiences with care. The suitability for this programme in low-income countries also needs to be established. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 5 | 25% |
| Australia | 3 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| Argentina | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 8 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 14 | 70% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 15% |
| Scientists | 2 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 152 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 152 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 10% |
| Researcher | 13 | 9% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 31 | 20% |
| Unknown | 53 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 38 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 16% |
| Psychology | 11 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Unknown | 54 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. 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 04 December 2017.
All research outputs
#568,617
of 23,508,125 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#91
of 4,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,760
of 418,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#2
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,508,125 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,317 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 418,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.