↓ Skip to main content

The impact of prescribed psychotropics on youth

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#27 of 216)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 tweeters
wikipedia
12 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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
The impact of prescribed psychotropics on youth
Published in
Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, January 2007
DOI 10.1186/1745-0179-3-21
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shaheen E Lakhan, Gareth E Hagger-Johnson

Abstract

Many psychotropics prescribed to children are unlicensed or off-label. This article uses the two most prescribed psychotropics (MPH and SSRIs) to illustrate various concerns about their impact on youth. Many mental illnesses begin in childhood or early adulthood, warranting a treatment of some kind. However, commentators have argued that prescribing is influenced by five myths: (1) children are little adults; (2) children have no reason to develop depression or anxiety; (3) psychiatric disorders are the same across adults and children; (3) children can be prescribed lower doses of the same drug; (5) drugs are preferable to alternative treatments and are more successful. Several lines of evidence suggest that these are incorrect assumptions. We update readers with recent research in relation to these myths, concluding that researchers should clarify child/adult differences for psychotropics, attend to the growth of "cosmetic" use of psychotropics in children and adolescents, and address concerns about the diagnostic validity of mental illness in the current DSM classification system.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Italy 1 <1%
Sudan 1 <1%
Nigeria 1 <1%
Iran, Islamic Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 123 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 18%
Student > Bachelor 19 15%
Researcher 16 12%
Student > Postgraduate 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 9%
Other 30 23%
Unknown 17 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 33%
Psychology 23 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Neuroscience 6 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 18 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 07 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,537,316
of 21,749,791 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health
#27
of 216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,375
of 175,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,749,791 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 175,817 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 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