↓ Skip to main content

Factors associated with failure to screen for syphilis during antenatal care in Ghana: a case control study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 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
Factors associated with failure to screen for syphilis during antenatal care in Ghana: a case control study
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12879-015-0868-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward Tieru Dassah, Yaw Adu-Sarkodie, Philippe Mayaud

Abstract

There is little data regarding the effect of ramping up new screening interventions on their uptake by target populations into routine care services in developing countries. This study aimed to determine patient-level factors associated with failure of pregnant women to get screened for syphilis during antenatal care, in the context of a national rollout of rapid syphilis point of care tests (POCTs) in Ghana. An unmatched 1:2 case control study conducted among women admitted for delivery in two district hospitals in the Ashanti Region of Ghana from August to October 2010, 7 to 9 months after the introduction of POCTs in the region. Cases were women who had not been screened for syphilis during antenatal care and controls were women who had been screened. Patient-reported factors for being unscreened were examined using logistic regression to obtain odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). 160 consecutive unscreened and 327 screened women were recruited. Most women had good knowledge of syphilis (58.7% among unscreened women vs. 64.2% among screened; P = 0.24). Factors associated with failure to get screened were: attending antenatal care in a private health facility (adjusted OR, 11.09; 95% CI 5.48-22.48), previous adverse pregnancy outcome (adjusted OR, 1.98; 95% CI 1.22-3.23) and not being screened for HIV during the current pregnancy (adjusted OR, 2.78; 95% CI 1.50-5.13). The odds of being unscreened also increased with decreasing doses of intermittent preventive treatment for malaria in pregnancy received (P trend < 0.001) and decreasing education level (P trend = 0.02). Significant risk factors for not being screened, following the national rollout of syphilis POCTs, related to the type of health facility where antenatal care was received and some of the women's personal characteristics. Targeting of private medical facilities to include syphilis POCTs and support other neglected public health interventions should be a priority.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 165 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 165 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 29 18%
Researcher 23 14%
Student > Bachelor 14 8%
Student > Postgraduate 12 7%
Other 8 5%
Other 35 21%
Unknown 44 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 16%
Social Sciences 14 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 47 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 13 March 2015.
All research outputs
#22,044,440
of 24,593,959 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#7,000
of 8,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,973
of 265,710 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#151
of 158 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,593,959 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 8,233 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. 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 265,710 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 158 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.