↓ Skip to main content

Effects of group metacognitive training (MCT) on mental capacity and functioning in patients with psychosis in a secure forensic psychiatric hospital: a prospective-cohort waiting list controlled…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
38 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Effects of group metacognitive training (MCT) on mental capacity and functioning in patients with psychosis in a secure forensic psychiatric hospital: a prospective-cohort waiting list controlled study
Published in
BMC Research Notes, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1756-0500-5-302
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie Naughton, Andrea Nulty, Zareena Abidin, Mary Davoren, Sarah O’Dwyer, Harry G Kennedy

Abstract

Metacognitive Training (MCT) is a manualised cognitive intervention for psychosis aimed at transferring knowledge of cognitive biases and providing corrective experiences. The aim of MCT is to facilitate symptom reduction and protect against relapse. In a naturalistic audit of clinical effectiveness we examined what effect group MCT has on mental capacity, symptoms of psychosis and global function in patients with a psychotic illness, when compared with a waiting list comparison group.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 126 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 15%
Student > Bachelor 20 15%
Student > Master 17 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 12%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 23 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 57 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 8%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Neuroscience 4 3%
Other 7 5%
Unknown 32 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 October 2012.
All research outputs
#13,952,183
of 24,072,790 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,677
of 4,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,175
of 166,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#41
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,072,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,361 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 166,973 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 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 57% of its contemporaries.