↓ Skip to main content

Obstetric ultrasound use in low and middle income countries: a narrative review

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, July 2018
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 (84th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
258 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
Obstetric ultrasound use in low and middle income countries: a narrative review
Published in
Reproductive Health, July 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12978-018-0571-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eunsoo Timothy Kim, Kavita Singh, Allisyn Moran, Deborah Armbruster, Naoko Kozuki

Abstract

Although growing, evidence on the impact, access, utility, effectiveness, and cost-benefit of obstetric ultrasound in resource-constrained settings is still somewhat limited. Hence, questions around the purpose and the intended benefit as well as potential challenges across various domains must be carefully reviewed prior to implementation and scale-up of obstetric ultrasound technology in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs). This narrative review discusses these issues for those trying to implement or scale-up ultrasound technology in LMICs. Issues addressed in this review include health personnel capacity, maintenance, cost, overuse and misuse of ultrasound, miscommunication between the providers and patients, patient diagnosis and care management, health outcomes, patient perceptions and concerns about fetal sex determination. As cost of obstetric ultrasound becomes more affordable in LMICs, it is essential to assess the benefits, trade-offs and potential drawbacks of large-scale implementation. Additionally, there is a need to more clearly identify the capabilities and the limitations of ultrasound, particularly within the context of limited training of providers, to ensure that the purpose for which an ultrasound is intended is actually feasible. We found evidence of obstetric uses of ultrasound improving patient management. However, there was evidence that ultrasound use is not associated with reducing maternal, perinatal or neonatal mortality. Patients in various studies reported to have both positive and negative perceptions and experiences related to ultrasound and lastly, illegal use of ultrasound for determining fetal sex was raised as a concern.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 258 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 258 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 13%
Student > Postgraduate 29 11%
Student > Bachelor 27 10%
Researcher 22 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 7%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 82 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 74 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 37 14%
Social Sciences 10 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 2%
Engineering 6 2%
Other 28 11%
Unknown 97 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 28 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,270,584
of 22,788,370 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#227
of 1,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,447
of 328,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#8
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,788,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 328,009 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.