↓ Skip to main content

Women’s decision-making processes and the influences on their mode of birth following a previous caesarean section in Taiwan: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, January 2018
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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Women’s decision-making processes and the influences on their mode of birth following a previous caesarean section in Taiwan: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12884-018-1661-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shu-Wen Chen, Alison M. Hutchinson, Cate Nagle, Tracey K. Bucknall

Abstract

Vaginal birth after caesarean (VBAC) is an alternative option for women who have had a previous caesarean section (CS); however, uptake is limited because of concern about the risks of uterine rupture. The aim of this study was to explore women's decision-making processes and the influences on their mode of birth following a previous CS. A qualitative approach was used. The research comprised three stages. Stage I consisted of naturalistic observation at 33-34 weeks' gestation. Stage II involved interviews with pregnant women at 35-37 weeks' gestation. Stage III consisted of interviews with the same women who were interviewed postnatally, 1 month after birth. The research was conducted in a private medical centre in northern Taiwan. Using a purposive sampling, 21 women and 9 obstetricians were recruited. Data collection involved in-depth interviews, observation and field notes. Constant comparative analysis was employed for data analysis. Ensuring the safety of mother and baby was the focus of women's decisions. Women's decisions-making influences included previous birth experience, concern about the risks of vaginal birth, evaluation of mode of birth, current pregnancy situation, information resources and health insurance. In communicating with obstetricians, some women complied with obstetricians' recommendations for repeat caesarean section (RCS) without being informed of alternatives. Others used four step decision-making processes that included searching for information, listening to obstetricians' professional judgement, evaluating alternatives, and making a decision regarding mode of birth. After birth, women reflected on their decisions in three aspects: reflection on birth choices; reflection on factors influencing decisions; and reflection on outcomes of decisions. The health and wellbeing of mother and baby were the major concerns for women. In response to the decision-making influences, women's interactions with obstetricians regarding birth choices varied from passive decision-making to shared decision-making. All women have the right to be informed of alternative birthing options. Routine provision of explanations by obstetricians regarding risks associated with alternative birth options, in addition to financial coverage for RCS from National Health Insurance, would assist women's decision-making. Establishment of a website to provide women with reliable information about birthing options may also assist women's decision-making.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 140 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 15%
Student > Bachelor 21 15%
Researcher 11 8%
Other 8 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 56 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 32 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 14%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Psychology 4 3%
Engineering 4 3%
Other 17 12%
Unknown 58 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 28 January 2018.
All research outputs
#3,277,633
of 23,325,355 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#908
of 4,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,185
of 443,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#31
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,325,355 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,290 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 443,557 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.