Internet searching after parents receive abnormal newborn screening results
Journal of Communication in Healthcare, ISSN: 1753-8076, Vol: 8, Issue: 4, Page: 303-315
2015
- 8Citations
- 27Usage
- 26Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations8
- Citation Indexes8
- Usage27
- Abstract Views27
- Captures26
- Readers26
- 26
Article Description
Many parents experience confusion and anxiety when their infant has an abnormal newborn screening result, especially for the heterozygous ‘carrier’ results that are typically communicated by primary care providers. The Internet is an important media source for health information, so many organizations have developed websites for parents after newborn screening. Surprisingly, little research has been done on the role that the Internet plays for parents after newborn screening. This qualitative study explored parents’ comments about the Internet included in open-ended interviews conducted as part of a larger study of parents after newborn screening identifies carrier status for cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease. Analysis used emergent theme coding and deductive coding grounded in uses and gratifications theory. Parents reported a variety of motivations for searching, and many parents volunteered that they had searched the Internet despite a physician’s recommendation to avoid the Internet in this matter. Parents described several strategies for Internet searching and related a mixture of positive and negative experiences. They also gave suggestions for better communication with healthcare providers regarding the Internet search that could have improved their understanding. The study’s results may help to guide providers’ discussions after newborn screening so that parents can maximize the benefits of the Internet search and minimize negative experiences. Further research may help to quantitatively describe the Internet experience after newborn screening, and to further understand how media use after newborn screening influences psychosocial outcomes.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84961801381&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/1753807615y.0000000007; http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1179/1753807615Y.0000000007; http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/10256018808623883; https://institutionalrepository.aah.org/neo/1; https://institutionalrepository.aah.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=neo
Informa UK Limited
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know