↓ Skip to main content

Explaining variation in Down’s syndrome screening uptake: comparing the Netherlands with England and Denmark using documentary analysis and expert stakeholder interviews

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
76 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
Explaining variation in Down’s syndrome screening uptake: comparing the Netherlands with England and Denmark using documentary analysis and expert stakeholder interviews
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-14-437
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neeltje MTH Crombag, Ynke E Vellinga, Sandra A Kluijfhout, Louise D Bryant, Pat A Ward, Rita Iedema-Kuiper, Peter CJI Schielen, Jozien M Bensing, Gerard HA Visser, Ann Tabor, Janet Hirst

Abstract

The offer of prenatal Down's syndrome screening is part of routine antenatal care in most of Europe; however screening uptake varies significantly across countries. Although a decision to accept or reject screening is a personal choice, it is unlikely that the widely differing uptake rates across countries can be explained by variation in individual values alone.The aim of this study was to compare Down's syndrome screening policies and programmes in the Netherlands, where uptake is relatively low (<30%) with England and Denmark where uptake is higher (74 and > 90% respectively), in an attempt to explain the observed variation in national uptake rates.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters 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 76 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 74 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 17%
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 14 18%
Unknown 14 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Social Sciences 8 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Psychology 4 5%
Other 16 21%
Unknown 14 18%

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 01 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,444,194
of 13,293,718 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#1,683
of 4,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,226
of 211,353 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,293,718 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 4,447 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 211,353 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them