↓ Skip to main content

Respectful maternal and newborn care: building a common agenda

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, May 2015
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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
201 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
Respectful maternal and newborn care: building a common agenda
Published in
Reproductive Health, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12978-015-0042-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emma Sacks, Mary V. Kinney

Abstract

In September, the World Health Organization released a statement on preventing and eliminating disrespect and abuse during facility-based childbirth. In addition to this important agenda, attention is also needed for the dignified care of newborn infants, who also deserve basic human rights and dignified care. In this commentary, we provide examples from the literature and other sources of where respectful care for newborn infants has been lacking and we give examples of opportunities for integration of maternal and newborn health care going forward. We illustrate the need for respectful treatment and consideration across the continuum of care: for mothers, stillborn infants, and all newborns, including those born too soon and those who die in infancy. We explain the need to document cases of neglect and abuse, count all births and deaths, and to include newborns and stillborn infants in the respectful care agenda and the post-2015 global reproductive care frameworks.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 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 201 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 199 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 13%
Researcher 23 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Student > Bachelor 16 8%
Other 42 21%
Unknown 39 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 53 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 50 25%
Social Sciences 26 13%
Arts and Humanities 4 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 22 11%
Unknown 43 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 06 March 2017.
All research outputs
#1,926,438
of 23,508,125 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#179
of 1,440 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,743
of 267,952 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#10
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,508,125 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,440 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 267,952 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.