↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for the management of reduced fetal movements in UK maternity units

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, March 2015
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 (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Evaluation of the quality of guidelines for the management of reduced fetal movements in UK maternity units
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12884-015-0484-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie Jokhan, Melissa K Whitworth, Felicity Jones, Ashleigh Saunders, Alexander E P Heazell

Abstract

The development of evidence-based guidelines is a key step in ensuring that maternity care is of a universally high standard. To influence patient care national and international guidelines need to be interpreted and implemented locally. In 2011, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists published guidelines for the management of reduced fetal movements (RFM), which can be an important symptom of fetal compromise. Following dissemination it was anticipated that this guidance would be implemented in UK maternity units. This study aimed to assess the quality of local guidelines for the management of RFM in comparison to published national standards. Cross-sectional survey of maternity unit guidelines for RFM. The guidelines were assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II Tool and scored by two independent investigators. Two national guidelines were used as standards to evaluate unit guidelines. Responses were received from 98 units (42%); 12 units had no guideline. National guidelines scored highly using the AGREE II tool but there was wide variation in the quality of individual maternity unit guidelines, which were frequently of low quality. No guidelines incorporated all the recommendations from the national guideline. Maternity unit guidelines performed well for clarity and presentation but had low scores for stakeholder involvement, rigour of development and applicability. In contrast to national evidence based guidance the quality of maternity unit guidelines for RFM is variable and frequently of low quality. To increase quality, guidelines need to include up to date evidence and audit standards which could be taken directly from national evidence-based guidance. Barriers to local implementation and resource implications need to be taken into consideration. Training may also improve the implementation of the guideline. Research is needed to inform strategies to realize the benefits of clinical guidance in practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 14 23%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 7%
Psychology 3 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 13 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 19 November 2015.
All research outputs
#5,646,549
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#1,440
of 4,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,958
of 257,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#38
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,185 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 257,881 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 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 57% of its contemporaries.