↓ Skip to main content

Barriers to reproductive health care for migrant women in Geneva: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
142 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
Barriers to reproductive health care for migrant women in Geneva: a qualitative study
Published in
Reproductive Health, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12978-018-0478-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

N. C. Schmidt, V. Fargnoli, M. Epiney, O. Irion

Abstract

Migrant mothers in developed countries often experience more complicated pregnancy outcomes and less fewer women access preventive gynecology services. To enlighten health care providers to potential barriers, the objective of this paper is to explore barriers to reproductive health services in Geneva described by migrant women from a qualitative perspective. In this qualitative study, thirteen focus groups (FG) involving 78 women aged 18 to 66 years were conducted in seven languages. All the FG discussions were audio-recorded and later transcribed. The data was classified, after which the main themes and sub-themes were manually extracted and analyzed. Barriers were classified either into structural or personal barriers aiming to describe factors influencing the accessibility of reproductive health services vs. those influencing client satisfaction. The five main themes that emerged were financial accessibility, language barriers, real or perceived discrimination, lack of information and embarrassment. Structural improvements which might meet the needs of the emergent extremely diverse population are the (1) provision of informative material that is easy to understand and available in multiple languages, (2) provision of sensitive cultural training including competence skill for all health professionals, (3) provision of specifically trained nurses or social assistance to guide migrants through the health system and (4) inclusion of monitoring and evaluation programs for the prevention of personal and systemic discrimination.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 142 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 14%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Researcher 10 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 26 18%
Unknown 45 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 14%
Social Sciences 18 13%
Psychology 7 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 46 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 20 July 2022.
All research outputs
#4,136,868
of 24,602,766 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#476
of 1,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,252
of 336,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#29
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,602,766 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 336,831 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.