↓ Skip to main content

Scaling up quality care for mothers and newborns around the time of birth: an overview of methods and analyses of intervention-specific bottlenecks and solutions

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, September 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 (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
401 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
Scaling up quality care for mothers and newborns around the time of birth: an overview of methods and analyses of intervention-specific bottlenecks and solutions
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/1471-2393-15-s2-s1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kim E Dickson, Mary V Kinney, Sarah G Moxon, Joanne Ashton, Nabila Zaka, Aline Simen-Kapeu, Gaurav Sharma, Kate J Kerber, Bernadette Daelmans, A Metin Gülmezoglu, Matthews Mathai, Christabel Nyange, Martina Baye, Joy E Lawn

Abstract

The Every Newborn Action Plan (ENAP) and Ending Preventable Maternal Mortality targets cannot be achieved without high quality, equitable coverage of interventions at and around the time of birth. This paper provides an overview of the methodology and findings of a nine paper series of in-depth analyses which focus on the specific challenges to scaling up high-impact interventions and improving quality of care for mothers and newborns around the time of birth, including babies born small and sick. The bottleneck analysis tool was applied in 12 countries in Africa and Asia as part of the ENAP process. Country workshops engaged technical experts to complete a tool designed to synthesise "bottlenecks" hindering the scale up of maternal-newborn intervention packages across seven health system building blocks. We used quantitative and qualitative methods and literature review to analyse the data and present priority actions relevant to different health system building blocks for skilled birth attendance, emergency obstetric care, antenatal corticosteroids (ACS), basic newborn care, kangaroo mother care (KMC), treatment of neonatal infections and inpatient care of small and sick newborns. The 12 countries included in our analysis account for the majority of global maternal (48%) and newborn (58%) deaths and stillbirths (57%). Our findings confirm previously published results that the interventions with the most perceived bottlenecks are facility-based where rapid emergency care is needed, notably inpatient care of small and sick newborns, ACS, treatment of neonatal infections and KMC. Health systems building blocks with the highest rated bottlenecks varied for different interventions. Attention needs to be paid to the context specific bottlenecks for each intervention to scale up quality care. Crosscutting findings on health information gaps inform two final papers on a roadmap for improvement of coverage data for newborns and indicate the need for leadership for effective audit systems. Achieving the Sustainable Development Goal targets for ending preventable mortality and provision of universal health coverage will require large-scale approaches to improving quality of care. These analyses inform the development of systematic, targeted approaches to strengthening of health systems, with a focus on overcoming specific bottlenecks for the highest impact interventions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 401 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Niger 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 393 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 71 18%
Researcher 53 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 10%
Student > Postgraduate 32 8%
Other 28 7%
Other 84 21%
Unknown 91 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 137 34%
Nursing and Health Professions 63 16%
Social Sciences 41 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 12 3%
Psychology 7 2%
Other 35 9%
Unknown 106 26%
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 26 March 2018.
All research outputs
#3,944,927
of 24,567,524 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#1,031
of 4,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,746
of 273,146 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#24
of 108 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,567,524 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 4,586 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 273,146 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 108 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.