↓ Skip to main content

Improving physical health and reducing substance use in psychosis – randomised control trial (IMPACT RCT): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, October 2013
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
2 blogs
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 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
Improving physical health and reducing substance use in psychosis – randomised control trial (IMPACT RCT): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-244x-13-263
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fiona Gaughran, Daniel Stahl, Khalida Ismail, Zerrin Atakan, John Lally, Poonam Gardner-Sood, Anita Patel, Anthony David, David Hopkins, Bee Harries, Philippa Lowe, Diana Orr, Maurice Arbuthnot, Robin M Murray, Kathryn E Greenwood, Shubulade Smith

Abstract

Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is increased in individuals with severe mental illnesses.We set out to establish a multicentre, two arm, parallel cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a health promotion intervention (HPI), IMPACT Therapy. The patient-tailored IMPACT Therapy aims to target one or more health behaviours from a pre-defined list that includes cannabis use; alcohol use; other substance use; cigarette smoking; exercise; diet and diabetic control, prioritising those identified as problematic by the patient, taking a motivational interviewing and CBT approach.

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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 215 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 15%
Researcher 31 14%
Student > Bachelor 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 8%
Other 30 14%
Unknown 47 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 59 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 35 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 9%
Social Sciences 12 6%
Sports and Recreations 7 3%
Other 16 7%
Unknown 67 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 13 April 2016.
All research outputs
#912,634
of 12,409,853 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#353
of 2,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,576
of 174,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#50
of 335 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,409,853 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 2,890 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. 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 174,199 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 335 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.