↓ Skip to main content

eRegistries: Electronic registries for maternal and child health

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, January 2016
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
328 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
eRegistries: Electronic registries for maternal and child health
Published in
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12884-016-0801-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Frederik Frøen, Sonja L. Myhre, Michael J. Frost, Doris Chou, Garrett Mehl, Lale Say, Socheat Cheng, Ingvild Fjeldheim, Ingrid K. Friberg, Steve French, Jagrati V. Jani, Jane Kaye, John Lewis, Ane Lunde, Kjersti Mørkrid, Victoria Nankabirwa, Linda Nyanchoka, Hollie Stone, Mahima Venkateswaran, Aleena M. Wojcieszek, Marleen Temmerman, Vicki J. Flenady

Abstract

The Global Roadmap for Health Measurement and Accountability sees integrated systems for health information as key to obtaining seamless, sustainable, and secure information exchanges at all levels of health systems. The Global Strategy for Women's, Children's and Adolescent's Health aims to achieve a continuum of quality of care with effective coverage of interventions. The WHO and World Bank recommend that countries focus on intervention coverage to monitor programs and progress for universal health coverage. Electronic health registries - eRegistries - represent integrated systems that secure a triple return on investments: First, effective single data collection for health workers to seamlessly follow individuals along the continuum of care and across disconnected cadres of care providers. Second, real-time public health surveillance and monitoring of intervention coverage, and third, feedback of information to individuals, care providers and the public for transparent accountability. This series on eRegistries presents frameworks and tools to facilitate the development and secure operation of eRegistries for maternal and child health. In this first paper of the eRegistries Series we have used WHO frameworks and taxonomy to map how eRegistries can support commonly used electronic and mobile applications to alleviate health systems constraints in maternal and child health. A web-based survey of public health officials in 64 low- and middle-income countries, and a systematic search of literature from 2005-2015, aimed to assess country capacities by the current status, quality and use of data in reproductive health registries. eRegistries can offer support for the 12 most commonly used electronic and mobile applications for health. Countries are implementing health registries in various forms, the majority in transition from paper-based data collection to electronic systems, but very few have eRegistries that can act as an integrating backbone for health information. More mature country capacity reflected by published health registry based research is emerging in settings reaching regional or national scale, increasingly with electronic solutions. 66 scientific publications were identified based on 32 registry systems in 23 countries over a period of 10 years; this reflects a challenging experience and capacity gap for delivering sustainable high quality registries. Registries are being developed and used in many high burden countries, but their potential benefits are far from realized as few countries have fully transitioned from paper-based health information to integrated electronic backbone systems. Free tools and frameworks exist to facilitate progress in health information for women and children.

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 328 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Unknown 324 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 73 22%
Researcher 50 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 7%
Student > Bachelor 22 7%
Student > Postgraduate 15 5%
Other 51 16%
Unknown 95 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 71 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 49 15%
Social Sciences 27 8%
Computer Science 16 5%
Engineering 10 3%
Other 56 17%
Unknown 99 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 17 June 2017.
All research outputs
#1,738,804
of 23,301,510 outputs
Outputs from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#428
of 4,284 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,412
of 396,857 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
#11
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,301,510 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,284 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 396,857 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.