↓ Skip to main content

Can life coaching improve health outcomes? – A systematic review of intervention studies

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, 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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
14 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
61 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
224 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
Can life coaching improve health outcomes? – A systematic review of intervention studies
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/1472-6963-13-428
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jette Ammentorp, Lisbeth Uhrenfeldt, Flemming Angel, Martin Ehrensvärd, Ebbe B Carlsen, Poul-Erik Kofoed

Abstract

In recent years, coaching has received special attention as a method to improve healthy lifestyle behaviours. The fact that coaching has found its way into healthcare and may provide new ways of engaging the patients and making them accountable for their health, justifies the need for an overview of the evidence regarding coaching interventions used in patient care, the effect of the interventions, and the quality of the studies published. However, in order to provide a clear definition of the coaching interventions selected for this review, we have found it necessary to distinguish between health coaching and life coaching. In this review, we will only focus on the latter method and on that basis assess the health related outcomes of life coaching.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 224 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Italy 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 218 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 34 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 12%
Researcher 23 10%
Student > Bachelor 19 8%
Student > Postgraduate 15 7%
Other 40 18%
Unknown 67 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 49 22%
Psychology 29 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 25 11%
Social Sciences 22 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 2%
Other 22 10%
Unknown 72 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 08 August 2023.
All research outputs
#1,613,754
of 25,301,208 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#537
of 8,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,601
of 220,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#11
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,301,208 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,602 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 220,040 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 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.