↓ Skip to main content

Knowledge, attitudes and practices of female genital mutilation/cutting among health care professionals in The Gambia: a multiethnic study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
220 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
Knowledge, attitudes and practices of female genital mutilation/cutting among health care professionals in The Gambia: a multiethnic study
Published in
BMC Public Health, September 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-13-851
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adriana Kaplan, Suiberto Hechavarría, Mariola Bernal, Isabelle Bonhoure

Abstract

Female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) is a harmful traditional practice with severe consequences for the health and well-being of girls and women. Health care professionals (HCPs) are therefore expected to be aware of how to identify and manage these consequences in order to ensure that those affected by the practice receive quality health care. Moreover, their integration and legitimacy within the communities allow them to play a key role in the prevention of the practice. Nevertheless, the perception of HCPs on FGM/C has been barely explored in African contexts. This study seeks to contribute to this field of knowledge by examining the knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding FGM/C among HCPs working in rural settings in The Gambia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 220 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Indonesia 2 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 216 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 18%
Student > Bachelor 25 11%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 5%
Other 42 19%
Unknown 62 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 35 16%
Social Sciences 21 10%
Psychology 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 74 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 November 2022.
All research outputs
#5,991,395
of 23,151,189 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#6,152
of 15,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,897
of 180,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#128
of 298 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,151,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 180,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 298 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.