↓ Skip to main content

The paradox of vaginal examination practice during normal childbirth: Palestinian women’s feelings, opinions, knowledge and experiences

Overview of attention for article published in Reproductive Health, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters
facebook
8 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
The paradox of vaginal examination practice during normal childbirth: Palestinian women’s feelings, opinions, knowledge and experiences
Published in
Reproductive Health, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1742-4755-9-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sahar J Hassan, Johanne Sundby, Abdullatif Husseini, Espen Bjertness

Abstract

Vaginal examination (VE), is a frequent procedure during childbirth. It is the most accepted ways to assess progress during childbirth, but its repetition at short intervals has no value. Over years, VE continued to be plagued by a nature that implies negative feelings and experiences of women. The aim of this exploratory qualitative study was to explore women's feelings, opinions, knowledge and experiences of vaginal examinations (VE) during normal childbirth.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 111 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 19%
Student > Bachelor 16 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Researcher 8 7%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 28 25%
Unknown 22 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 32 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 27%
Social Sciences 13 12%
Psychology 3 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 2%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 24 21%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 20 February 2020.
All research outputs
#4,107,152
of 17,027,788 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#403
of 1,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,654
of 137,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#1
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,027,788 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,114 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 137,708 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them