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 |
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. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| France | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 6 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 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 | 140 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 23 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 7% |
| Researcher | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 20% |
| Unknown | 44 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 32 | 23% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 11% |
| Psychology | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 6% |
| Unknown | 47 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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
#5,671,899
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Reproductive Health
#565
of 1,447 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,760
of 171,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reproductive Health
#5
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 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 1,447 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 171,457 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.