↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Intrapartum ultrasound: viewpoint of midwives and parturient women and reproducibility

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Women's Health, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Intrapartum ultrasound: viewpoint of midwives and parturient women and reproducibility
Published in
International Journal of Women's Health, June 2018
DOI 10.2147/ijwh.s155865
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adrielle Van Adrichem, Ellen Faes, Kristof Kinget, Yves Jacquemyn

Abstract

Vaginal examination (VE) is known to be subjective in interpretation and is considered uncomfortable by many women. Intrapartum ultrasound aims to be more objective and less invasive. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the acceptability of introducing intrapartum ultrasound to both midwives and parturients. Furthermore, we wanted to evaluate the reproducibility of different measurements when introduced de novo among operators without prior ultrasound experience. This study determined intra- and interobserver variability of intrapartum ultrasound in nulliparous women in labor. Ultrasound examinations were performed independently by a midwife and a gynecologist. The symphysis-head distance (SHD) and the angle of progression (AOP) were measured by translabial ultrasound. Structured questionnaires were given to midwives and parturients. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and limits of agreement (LA) were calculated to evaluate variability. A total of 33 patients were included; of whom, 28 filled in the questionnaire. A total of 19 midwives working on a delivery ward were asked to respond to the questionnaire, and 13 returned the forms. Midwives clearly continued to prefer VE over ultrasound, the majority evaluated translabial ultrasound as easy to use, but some declared to be unable to use it. The majority of patients, 71%, preferred ultrasound over VE. Reproducibility of intrapartum trans-labial ultrasound was good; ICC for interobserver variability was 0.603 (p=0.001) for SHD, and ICC for intraobserver variability was 0.844 (p<0.001) and 0.914 (p<0.001) for SHD and AOP, respectively. Patients prefer ultrasound over VE; midwives tend to stick to trusted VE. Reproducibility of intrapartum ultrasound in non-experienced operators is good.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 19%
Student > Postgraduate 6 19%
Student > Bachelor 5 16%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 May 2019.
All research outputs
#5,804,922
of 23,088,369 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Women's Health
#238
of 790 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,520
of 330,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Women's Health
#6
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,088,369 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 790 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 330,320 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 62% of its contemporaries.