↓ Skip to main content

Enrolling pregnant women in research: ethical challenges encountered in Lao PDR (Laos)

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Enrolling pregnant women in research: ethical challenges encountered in Lao PDR (Laos)
Published in
Reproductive Health, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12978-017-0428-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vilada Chansamouth, Rose McGready, Danoy Chommanam, Soukanya Homsombath, Mayfong Mayxay, Paul N. Newton

Abstract

Laos has the highest maternal mortality ratio in mainland Southeast Asia but there has been little research conducted with pregnant women. We aim to discuss ethical challenges in enrolling pregnant women in research as a part of large pregnancy cohort study in Laos. From 2013 to 2015, a prospective cohort study was conducted with 1000 pregnant women in a rural area of Vientiane, Laos, to determine whether fevers were associated with maternal morbidity and small for gestational age. Incidence of fever was 10% and incidence of small for gestational age was 12%. Level of education, cultural norms about family decision-making, and misconceptions about healthcare during pregnancy were three common issues encountered in enrolling pregnant women to this study. Only 47% of recruited women had completed primary school with no further education, which could affect the decisions women make to participate and remain in the study. Family decision-making is common in Laos; in some cases, we could not recruit pregnant women without agreement from their families. In Laos, many pregnant women and their families had strong beliefs in travelling during late pregnancy or losing small amount of blood (giving ~5 ml blood sample) could negatively impact their pregnancies. These misconceptions affected not only the quality of the study but also the women's opportunities to access healthcare. Good engagement between the research team and study participants, and the provision of more health information to the community, were essential to reducing issues experienced in enrolling pregnant women in this study.

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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Researcher 4 9%
Lecturer 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 16 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Social Sciences 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Psychology 2 4%
Other 8 17%
Unknown 15 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2018.
All research outputs
#11,895,040
of 13,415,596 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#847
of 889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#325,204
of 385,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#62
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,415,596 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 385,124 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.