↓ Skip to main content

A call for better care: the impact of postnatal contact services on women’s parenting confidence and experiences of postpartum care in Queensland, Australia

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
A call for better care: the impact of postnatal contact services on women’s parenting confidence and experiences of postpartum care in Queensland, Australia
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, December 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12913-014-0635-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yvette D Miller, Aimée C Dane, Rachel Thompson

Abstract

BackgroundUniversal postnatal contact services are provided in several Australian states, but their impact on women¿s postnatal care experience has not been evaluated. Furthermore, there is lack of evidence or consensus about the optimal type and amount of postpartum care after hospital discharge for maternal outcomes. This study aimed to assess the impact of providing Universal Postnatal Contact Service (UPNCS) funding to public birthing facilities in Queensland, Australia on women¿s postnatal care experiences, and associations between amount and type (telephone or home visits) of contact on parenting confidence, and perceived sufficiency and quality of postnatal care.MethodsData collected via retrospective survey of postnatal women (N¿=¿3,724) were used to compare women who birthed in UPNCS-funded and non-UPNCS-funded facilities on parenting confidence, sufficiency of postnatal care, and perceived quality of postnatal care. Associations between receiving telephone and home visits and the same outcomes, regardless of UPNCS funding, were also assessed.ResultsWomen who birthed in an UPNCS-funded facility were more likely to receive postnatal contact, but UPNCS funding was not associated with parenting confidence, or perceived sufficiency or perceived quality of care. Telephone contact was not associated with parenting confidence but had a positive dose¿response association with perceived sufficiency and quality. Home visits were negatively associated with parenting confidence when 3 or more were received, had a positive dose¿response association with perceived sufficiency and were positively associated with perceived quality when at least 6 were received.ConclusionsFunding for UPNCS is unlikely to improve population levels of maternal parenting confidence, perceived sufficiency or quality of postpartum care. Where only minimal contact can be provided, telephone may be more effective than home visits for improving women¿s perceived sufficiency and quality of care. Additional service initiatives may be needed to improve women¿s parenting confidence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
New Zealand 1 1%
Unknown 90 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 24%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 7 8%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 12 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 26 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 23%
Social Sciences 12 13%
Psychology 6 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 15 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 April 2016.
All research outputs
#7,459,034
of 12,372,945 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#2,756
of 4,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,063
of 275,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#353
of 504 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,945 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 275,187 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 504 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.