↓ Skip to main content

38.8 million additional modern contraceptive users: this, in fact, is “a never-before opportunity to strengthen investment and action on adolescent contraception”

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, 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 (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
30 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 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
38.8 million additional modern contraceptive users: this, in fact, is “a never-before opportunity to strengthen investment and action on adolescent contraception”
Published in
Reproductive Health, January 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12978-018-0457-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Venkatraman Chandra-Mouli, Marina Plesons, Emily Sullivan, Lianne Gonsalves, Lale Say

Abstract

We thank Bijlmakers et al. for their interest in our article, "A never-before opportunity to strengthen investment and action on adolescent contraception, and what we must do to make full use of it", and are grateful for the opportunity to respond to their four key assertions. First, we fully agree that sexual rights are controversial, which we discussed in depth in our original article. However, we reaffirm that there is global consensus on adolescent contraception as evidenced in part by recent data emerging from FP2020 on 38.8 million additional modern contraceptive users, the Global Goods and commitments emanating from the 2017 FP2020 summit, and their translated actions at the country level. Additionally, we clarify WHO's working definitions of sex, sexual health, and sexuality, and introduce WHO's newly released Operational Framework on Sexual Health and its Linkages to Reproductive Health. We welcome and agree with Bijlmakers et al.'s second point, which elaborates on the barrier of restrictive laws and policies. To address this barrier, we describe examples of resources that can help programmes understand the political/social context that drives these laws and policies at national and subnational levels, and identify programmatic gaps and best practices to address them within specific political/social contexts. We also welcome and agree with Bijlmakers et al.'s third point, which reiterates that discomfort around adolescent sexuality is a major barrier for sexuality education. In response, we point to four relevant reviews of CSE policies and their implementation, our original article's description of three programmes that have successfully addressed inadequate teacher skills, and our ongoing work on documenting strategies to build an enabling environment for CSE and deal with resistance. Lastly, we wholeheartedly agree that the harmful policies noted by Bijlmakers et al. are damaging to international efforts to improve adolescent SRH and rights. We argue, though, that these policies alone will not undermine efforts by countless other stakeholders around the world who are working in defence and promotion of adolescents' SRH and rights. Despite the many valid obstacles noted by Bijlmakers et al., we truly believe that this is "a never-before opportunity to strengthen investment and action on adolescent contraception".

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 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 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 48 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 21%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Master 4 8%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 17%
Social Sciences 7 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 13%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 4%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 14 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 16 July 2018.
All research outputs
#1,101,760
of 17,847,557 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#92
of 1,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,736
of 377,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,847,557 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,155 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 377,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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