↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Effects of Community Participation on Improving Uptake of Skilled Care for Maternal and Newborn Health: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
267 Mendeley
Title
Effects of Community Participation on Improving Uptake of Skilled Care for Maternal and Newborn Health: A Systematic Review
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0055012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cicely Marston, Alicia Renedo, C. R. McGowan, Anayda Portela

Abstract

Despite a broad consensus that communities should be actively involved in improving their own health, evidence for the effect of community participation on specific health outcomes is limited. We examine the effectiveness of community participation interventions in maternal and newborn health, asking: did participation improve outcomes? We also look at how the impact of community participation has been assessed, particularly through randomised controlled trials, and make recommendations for future research. We highlight the importance of qualitative investigation, suggesting key areas for qualitative data reporting alongside quantitative work.

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 267 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Uganda 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Sierra Leone 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 252 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 48 18%
Student > Master 48 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 10%
Student > Postgraduate 19 7%
Other 17 6%
Other 43 16%
Unknown 64 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 73 27%
Social Sciences 43 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 2%
Other 24 9%
Unknown 79 30%