↓ Skip to main content

Reducing suicidal thoughts in the Australian general population through web-based self-help: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
256 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
Reducing suicidal thoughts in the Australian general population through web-based self-help: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13063-015-0589-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bregje AJ van Spijker, Alison L Calear, Philip J Batterham, Andrew J Mackinnon, John A Gosling, Ad JFM Kerkhof, Daniela Solomon, Helen Christensen

Abstract

Suicidal thoughts are common in the general population, causing significant disability. However, a substantial number of people struggling with suicidality do not access appropriate services. Online self-help may help overcome barriers to help-seeking. This study aims to examine the effectiveness of an online self-help program targeted at reducing suicidal thoughts compared with an attention-matched control condition in the Australian adult population. This trial is based on a Dutch self-help program, which was found to be effective in reducing suicidal thoughts.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Thailand 1 <1%
Unknown 254 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 39 15%
Student > Bachelor 39 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 14%
Student > Master 37 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Other 36 14%
Unknown 49 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 93 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 14%
Social Sciences 20 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 5%
Neuroscience 7 3%
Other 22 9%
Unknown 64 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 28 January 2016.
All research outputs
#12,193,348
of 21,995,459 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#2,772
of 5,654 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,930
of 231,164 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,995,459 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,654 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 231,164 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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