| Title |
Intrauterine contraception after cesarean section and during lactation: a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Women's Health, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijwh.s53845 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Norman D Goldstuck, Petrus S Steyn |
| Abstract |
All postpartum women, including those who are breastfeeding or have had a cesarean section, appear potentially suited to intrauterine contraception, a long acting reversible contraceptive (LARC). Like any other method used after delivery, it should not interfere with lactation or be affected by cesarean section. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 2 | 40% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 12% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Researcher | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 18% |
| Unknown | 16 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 29 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 19 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 December 2013.
All research outputs
#12,828,361
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Women's Health
#351
of 763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,314
of 307,131 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Women's Health
#13
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 763 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 307,131 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.