↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy: guidance for its use as an outcome measure

Overview of attention for article published in Patient related outcome measures, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#50 of 186)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
Title
London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy: guidance for its use as an outcome measure
Published in
Patient related outcome measures, April 2017
DOI 10.2147/prom.s122420
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer A Hall, Geraldine Barrett, Andrew Copas, Judith Stephenson

Abstract

The London Measure of Unplanned Pregnancy (LMUP) is a psychometrically validated measure of the degree of intention of a current or recent pregnancy. The LMUP is increasingly being used worldwide, and can be used to evaluate family planning or preconception care programs. However, beyond recommending the use of the full LMUP scale, there is no published guidance on how to use the LMUP as an outcome measure. Ordinal logistic regression has been recommended informally, but studies published to date have all used binary logistic regression and dichotomized the scale at different cut points. There is thus a need for evidence-based guidance to provide a standardized methodology for multivariate analysis and to enable comparison of results. This paper makes recommendations for the regression method for analysis of the LMUP as an outcome measure. Data collected from 4,244 pregnant women in Malawi were used to compare five regression methods: linear, logistic with two cut points, and ordinal logistic with either the full or grouped LMUP score. The recommendations were then tested on the original UK LMUP data. There were small but no important differences in the findings across the regression models. Logistic regression resulted in the largest loss of information, and assumptions were violated for the linear and ordinal logistic regression. Consequently, robust standard errors were used for linear regression and a partial proportional odds ordinal logistic regression model attempted. The latter could only be fitted for grouped LMUP score. We recommend the linear regression model with robust standard errors to make full use of the LMUP score when analyzed as an outcome measure. Ordinal logistic regression could be considered, but a partial proportional odds model with grouped LMUP score may be required. Logistic regression is the least-favored option, due to the loss of information. For logistic regression, the cut point for un/planned pregnancy should be between nine and ten. These recommendations will standardize the analysis of LMUP data and enhance comparability of results across studies.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 127 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 25 20%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Researcher 10 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 42 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 37 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 29 23%
Social Sciences 7 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 43 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 30 August 2019.
All research outputs
#7,856,238
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Patient related outcome measures
#50
of 186 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,580
of 324,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Patient related outcome measures
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 186 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 324,452 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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