↓ Skip to main content

Understanding the impact of visual arts interventions for people living with dementia: a realist review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, August 2014
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 (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 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
Understanding the impact of visual arts interventions for people living with dementia: a realist review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/2046-4053-3-91
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gill Windle, Samantha Gregory, Andrew Newman, Anna Goulding, Dave O'Brien, Clive Parkinson

Abstract

Arts-based activities are being increasingly suggested as a valuable activity for people living with dementia in terms of countering the negative aspects of their condition. The potential for such programmes to improve a broad range of psychosocial outcomes is suggested in some studies. However, there is largely an absence of rigorous methodology to demonstrate the benefits, and research results are mixed. Practice variability in terms of the content, contexts and implementation of such interventions raises challenges in terms of identifying an optimal arts programme model that could be adopted by other service providers. Understanding how interventions may have the best chance at broad implementation success and uptake is limited.Methods/design: A realist review will be undertaken. This aims to understand how visual arts interventions influence outcomes in people living with dementia. The review will explore how the context, that is the circumstances which enable or constrain, affect outcomes through the activation of mechanisms. An early scoping search and a stakeholder survey formulated the preliminary programme theory. A systematic literature search across a broad range of disciplines (arts, humanities, social sciences, health) will be undertaken to identify journal articles and grey literature. Data will be extracted in relation to the programme theory, contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes and their configurations, background information about the study design and participant characteristics, detail about the quantity ('dose') of an intervention, theoretical perspectives proposed by the authors of the paper and further theorising by the reviewer. Thematic connections/patterns will be sought across the extracted data, identifying patterns amongst contextual factors, the mechanisms they trigger and the associated outcomes.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 5%
Canada 2 3%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 73 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 23%
Researcher 13 16%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Other 18 23%
Unknown 6 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 18%
Social Sciences 14 18%
Arts and Humanities 10 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 8%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 7 9%

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 16 September 2014.
All research outputs
#1,408,850
of 16,186,884 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#280
of 1,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,258
of 202,526 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,186,884 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 202,526 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 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