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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Contraceptive use following spontaneous and induced abortion and its association with family planning services in primary health care: results from a Brazilian longitudinal study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Reproductive Health, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12978-015-0087-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ana Luiza Vilela Borges, Funmilola OlaOlorun, Elizabeth Fujimori, Luiza Akiko Komura Hoga, Amy Ong Tsui |
| Abstract |
Although it is well known that post-abortion contraceptive use is high when family planning services are provided following spontaneous or induced abortions, this relationship remains unclear in Brazil and similar settings with restrictive abortion laws. Our study aims to assess whether contraceptive use is associated with access to family planning services in the six-month period post-abortion, in a setting where laws towards abortion are highly restrictive. This prospective cohort study recruited 147 women hospitalized for emergency treatment following spontaneous or induced abortion in Brazil. These women were then followed up for six months (761 observations). Women responded to monthly telephone interviews about contraceptive use and the utilization of family planning services (measured by the utilization of medical consultation and receipt of contraceptive counseling). Generalized Estimating Equations were used to analyze the effect of family planning services and other covariates on contraceptive use over the six-month period post-abortion. Women who reported utilization of both medical consultation and contraceptive counseling in the same month had higher odds of reporting contraceptive use during the six-month period post-abortion, when compared with those who did not use these family planning services [adjusted aOR = 1.93, 95 % Confidence Interval: 1.13-3.30]. Accessing either service alone did not contribute to contraceptive use. Age (25-34 vs. 15-24 years) was also statistically associated with contraceptive use. Pregnancy planning status, desire to have more children and education did not contribute to contraceptive use. In restrictive abortion settings, family planning services offered in the six-month post-abortion period contribute to contraceptive use, if not restricted to simple counseling. Medical consultation, in the absence of contraceptive counseling, makes no difference. Immediate initiation of a contraceptive that suits women's pregnancy intention following an abortion is recommended, as well as a wide range of contraceptive methods, including long-acting reversible methods, even in restrictive abortion laws contexts. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 166 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 37 | 22% |
| Researcher | 27 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 16% |
| Unknown | 42 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 39 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 29 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 21 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 26 | 15% |
| Unknown | 45 | 27% |
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 26 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#1,251
of 1,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,205
of 291,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,567 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 291,054 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.