↓ Skip to main content

Availability and use of magnesium sulphate at health care facilities in two selected districts of North Karnataka, India

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Availability and use of magnesium sulphate at health care facilities in two selected districts of North Karnataka, India
Published in
Reproductive Health, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12978-018-0531-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Geetanjali Katageri, Umesh Charantimath, Anjali Joshi, Marianne Vidler, Umesh Ramadurg, Sumedha Sharma, Sheshidhar Bannale, Beth A. Payne, Sangamesh Rakaraddi, Chandrashekhar Karadiguddi, Geetanjali Mungarwadi, Avinash Kavi, Diane Sawchuck, Richard Derman, Shivaprasad Goudar, Ashalata Mallapur, Mrutyunjaya Bellad, Laura A. Magee, Rahat Qureshi, Peter von Dadelszen, the Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) India Feasibility Working Group

Abstract

Pre-eclampsia and eclampsia are major causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. Magnesium sulphate is accepted as the anticonvulsant of choice in these conditions and is present on the WHO essential medicines list and the Indian National List of Essential Medicines, 2015. Despite this, magnesium sulphate is not widely used in India for pre-eclampsia and eclampsia. In addition to other factors, lack of availability may be a reason for sub-optimal usage. This study was undertaken to assess the availability and use of magnesium sulphate at public and private health care facilities in two districts of North Karnataka, India. A facility assessment survey was undertaken as part of the Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia (CLIP) Feasibility Study which was undertaken prior to the CLIP Trials (NCT01911494). This study was undertaken in 12 areas of Belagavi and Bagalkote districts of North Karnataka, India and included a survey of 88 facilities. Data were collected in all facilities by interviewing the health care providers and analysed using Excel. Of the 88 facilities, 28 were public, and 60 were private. In the public facilities, magnesium sulphate was available in six out of 10 Primary Health Centres (60%), in all eight taluka (sub-district) hospitals (100%), five of eight community health centres (63%) and both district hospitals (100%). Fifty-five of 60 private facilities (92%) reported availability of magnesium sulphate. Stock outs were reported in six facilities in the preceding six months - five public and one private. Twenty-five percent weight/volume and 50% weight/volume concentration formulations were available variably across the public and private facilities. Sixty-eight facilities (77%) used the drug for severe pre-eclampsia and 12 facilities (13.6%) did not use the drug even for eclampsia. Varied dosing schedules were reported from facility to facility. Poor availability of magnesium sulphate was identified in many facilities, and stock outs in some. Individual differences in usage were identified. Ensuring a reliable supply of magnesium sulphate, standard formulations and recommendations of dosage schedules and training may help improve use; and decrease morbidity and mortality due to pre-eclampsia/ eclampsia. The CLIP trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01911494 ).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 12%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 28 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 31 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 June 2018.
All research outputs
#13,265,775
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#935
of 1,426 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,999
of 328,678 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#42
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,426 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.1. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 328,678 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.