↓ Skip to main content

Providing mental health first aid in the workplace: a Delphi consensus study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychology, August 2016
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 (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 tweeters
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Providing mental health first aid in the workplace: a Delphi consensus study
Published in
BMC Psychology, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40359-016-0148-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nataly Bovopoulos, Anthony F. Jorm, Kathy S. Bond, Anthony D. LaMontagne, Nicola J. Reavley, Claire M. Kelly, Betty A. Kitchener, Angela Martin

Abstract

Mental health problems are common in the workplace, but workers affected by such problems are not always well supported by managers and co-workers. Guidelines exist for the public on how to provide mental health first aid, but not specifically on how to tailor one's approach if the person of concern is a co-worker or employee. A Delphi consensus study was carried out to develop guidelines on additional considerations required when offering mental health first aid in a workplace context. A systematic search of websites, books and journal articles was conducted to develop a questionnaire with 246 items containing actions that someone may use to offer mental health first aid to a co-worker or employee. Three panels of experts from English-speaking countries were recruited (23 consumers, 26 managers and 38 workplace mental health professionals), who independently rated the items over three rounds for inclusion in the guidelines. The retention rate of the expert panellists across the three rounds was 61.7 %. Of the 246 items, 201 items were agreed to be important or very important by at least 80 % of panellists. These 201 endorsed items included actions on how to approach and offer support to a co-worker, and additional considerations where the person assisting is a supervisor or manager, or is assisting in crisis situations such as acute distress. The guidelines outline strategies for a worker to use when they are concerned about the mental health of a co-worker or employee. They will be used to inform future tailoring of Mental Health First Aid training when it is delivered in workplace settings and could influence organisational policies and procedures.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 16%
Researcher 11 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Other 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 26 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 17 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 12%
Social Sciences 9 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 5%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 28 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 17 April 2017.
All research outputs
#1,918,156
of 15,980,332 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychology
#105
of 386 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,023
of 267,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,980,332 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 386 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 267,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them