↓ Skip to main content

Relating therapy for voices (the R2V study): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Relating therapy for voices (the R2V study): study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-15-325
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mark Hayward, Clara Strauss, Leanne Bogen-Johnston

Abstract

Evidence exists for the effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis with moderate effect sizes, but the evidence for cognitive behaviour therapy specifically for distressing voices is less convincing. An alternative symptom-based approach may be warranted and a body of literature has explored distressing voices from an interpersonal perspective. This literature has informed the development of relating therapy and findings from a case series suggested that this intervention was acceptable to hearers and therapists.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Researcher 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 53%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 15 26%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 10 September 2014.
All research outputs
#6,627,565
of 8,702,492 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#1,892
of 2,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,253
of 185,861 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#74
of 85 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,702,492 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,362 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 185,861 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 85 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.