↓ Skip to main content

Evidence-based policy responses to strengthen health, community and legislative systems that care for women in Australia with female genital mutilation / cutting

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
211 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
Evidence-based policy responses to strengthen health, community and legislative systems that care for women in Australia with female genital mutilation / cutting
Published in
Reproductive Health, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12978-017-0324-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nesrin Varol, John J. Hall, Kirsten Black, Sabera Turkmani, Angela Dawson

Abstract

The physical and psychological impact of female genital mutilation / cutting (FGM/C) can be substantial, long term, and irreversible. Parts of the health sector in Australia have developed guidelines in the management of FGM/C, but large gaps exist in community and professional knowledge of the consequences and treatment of FGM/C. The prevalence of FGM/C amongst Australian women is unknown. Our article reviews the literature on research on FGM/C in Australia, which focuses on health system response to women and girls with FGM/C. Recommendations are made for policy reform in health, legislation, and community programs to provide the best healthcare, protect children, and help communities abandon this harmful practice. Midwives and doctors in Australia acknowledged a lack of knowledge on FGM/C, clinical guidelines and consequences for maternity care. In a metropolitan Australian hospital with specialised FGM/C care, women with FGM/C had similar obstetric outcomes as women without FGM/C, underlining the importance of holistic FGM/C clinics. Greater focus on integration of refugee and migrant populations into their new cultures may be an important way of facilitating the abandonment of this practice, as is education of communities that practise FGM/C, and experts involved in the care and protection of children. Men could be important advocates for protecting women and girls from violence and FGM/C through a man-to-man strategy with programs focussing on men's health and other personal issues, education, and communication. The Australian Government has identified gender-based violence as an area of priority and has been implementing a National plan to reduce violence against women and their children 2010-2022. A multidisciplinary network of experts on FGM/C could be established within this taskforce to develop well-defined and rapid referral pathways to care for and protect these children, as well as coordinate education and prevention programs to help communities abandon this harmful practice. Countries of migration can be part of the solution for abandonment of FGM/C through community interventions and implementation of national and coordinated training in FGM/C of experts involved in the care and protection of children and women. The global focus on collaboration on research, training and prevention programs should be fostered between countries of FGM/C prevalence and migration.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 211 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 211 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 35 17%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 10%
Researcher 17 8%
Other 34 16%
Unknown 54 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 30 14%
Social Sciences 25 12%
Psychology 18 9%
Unspecified 7 3%
Other 22 10%
Unknown 64 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 26 August 2019.
All research outputs
#5,235,051
of 17,364,317 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#625
of 1,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,532
of 277,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,364,317 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 277,349 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.