↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Fertility awareness‐based methods for contraception

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
3 X users
wikipedia
17 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
185 Mendeley
Title
Fertility awareness‐based methods for contraception
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, October 2004
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd004860.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

David A Grimes, Maria F Gallo, Vera Halpern, Kavita Nanda, Kenneth F Schulz, Laureen M Lopez

Abstract

"Fertility awareness-based methods" (FAB) of family planning "involve identification of the fertile days of the menstrual cycle, whether by observing fertility signs such as cervical secretions and basal body temperature, or by monitoring cycle days. FAB methods can be used in combination with abstinence or barrier methods during the fertile time" (WHO 2000). Several names have been used to describe this approach to contraception, including "rhythm," "natural family planning" and "periodic abstinence." Fertility awareness-based methods can be used with abstinence from sexual intercourse. Alternatively, they can be used with barrier contraceptives or withdrawal during presumed fertile times.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 183 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 16%
Student > Bachelor 20 11%
Researcher 19 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 9%
Other 10 5%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 64 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 11%
Social Sciences 14 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 3%
Psychology 4 2%
Other 18 10%
Unknown 70 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 24. 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 09 October 2022.
All research outputs
#1,643,436
of 25,996,988 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,362
of 13,173 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,081
of 76,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,996,988 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,173 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 76,270 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.