↓ Skip to main content

The involvement of men in maternal health care: cross-sectional, pilot case studies from Maligita and Kibibi, Uganda

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
384 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
The involvement of men in maternal health care: cross-sectional, pilot case studies from Maligita and Kibibi, Uganda
Published in
Reproductive Health, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1742-4755-11-68
Pubmed ID
Authors

Debra Singh, May Lample, Jaya Earnest

Abstract

The International Conference on Population Development held in Cairo in 1994 identified the importance of male involvement in reproductive health programs. Since then, there has been an increase in reproductive health initiatives that target both men and women in an attempt to fulfill the 5th Millenium Development Goal. Yet, while the benefits of male involvement have been acknowledged, there continues to be a challenge in creating a space for and engaging men in maternal health. This is problematic due to the role of men as the head of the household in many countries, especially developing countries, which suffer from higher rates of maternal mortality. Furthermore, men are important as partners, fathers and health care professionals and as such it is important to involve and engage with men in maternal health education, and antenatal care.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 384 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Malawi 1 <1%
Unknown 382 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 104 27%
Student > Bachelor 45 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 9%
Researcher 31 8%
Student > Postgraduate 25 7%
Other 59 15%
Unknown 87 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 93 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 91 24%
Social Sciences 43 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 3%
Psychology 7 2%
Other 37 10%
Unknown 102 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 24 August 2015.
All research outputs
#3,619,172
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#388
of 1,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,133
of 238,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#17
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,409 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 238,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.