↓ Skip to main content

Use of emergency contraception among women with experience of domestic violence and abuse: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Women's Health, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#48 of 2,007)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
46 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Use of emergency contraception among women with experience of domestic violence and abuse: a systematic review
Published in
BMC Women's Health, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12905-018-0652-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalia V. Lewis, Theresa H. M. Moore, Gene S. Feder, John Macleod, Penny Whiting

Abstract

Exposure to domestic violence and abuse (DVA) results in a reduction of women's use of regular contraceptives. This evidence suggests that women exposed to DVA are more likely to have unprotected sexual intercourse and therefore may use more emergency contraception (EC) than those women who are not exposed to DVA. We aimed to test this hypothesis through evaluating the evidence for an association between exposure to DVA and use of EC. We systematically searched eight electronic databases from inception until December 2017, checked references and citations, and contacted corresponding authors. Primary studies that evaluated the association between exposure to DVA and use of EC were included. Two reviewers were involved in screening, data extraction, quality assessment and analysis. We evaluated the quality of included studies with the adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We used tables and descriptive text to summarise and synthesise the data. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each estimate of the association between DVA and use of EC were plotted on a forest plot. Our search retrieved 1216 records of which six studies with 15,297 women were included. Five studies were observational; one study included intervention on the outcome (advance supply of EC). All studies were at high risk of bias. Four studies provided evidence of an association between DVA and EC use - ORs from 1.51 (95% CI 1.13, 2.02) to 6.50 (95% CI 4.15, 10.17). Two studies found no evidence of a such association - ORs 0.46 (95% CI 0.11, 1.96) and 0.76 (95% CI 0.29, 1.98). The latter differed by how the authors recruited participants, measured EC use and adjusted for confounders. This systematic review provides some evidence of increased use of EC among women exposed to DVA. Request for EC can indicate possible exposure to DVA. Therefore, each consultation for EC could be an appropriate context for clinical enquiry about DVA and signposting/referral to specialist DVA services. PROSPERO CRD42017058221 .

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 46 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 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 14%
Researcher 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 4%
Other 10 9%
Unknown 42 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 16 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 13%
Social Sciences 13 12%
Psychology 10 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 45 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. 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 09 July 2019.
All research outputs
#586,368
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#48
of 2,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,590
of 342,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#3
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,007 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 342,909 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.