↓ Skip to main content

Service users’ involvement in the development of individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (iCST) for dementia: a qualitative study

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
104 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
Service users’ involvement in the development of individual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (iCST) for dementia: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Geriatrics, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12877-015-0004-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lauren A Yates, Martin Orrell, Aimee Spector, Vasiliki Orgeta

Abstract

BackgroundIndividual Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (iCST) is a one to one, carer led psychosocial intervention for people with dementia, adapted from group Cognitive Stimulation Therapy (CST). It is increasingly recognised that involving service users in research is key to developing interventions and treatments that successfully address their needs. This study describes the contribution of people with dementia and carers during the development phase of the intervention and materials.MethodsTwenty-eight people with dementia and 24 carers were consulted in a series of six focus groups and 10 interviews. The purpose of this study was to gain insight into perceptions of mental stimulation from the point of view of carers and people with dementia, to ensure the materials are easy to use, clear, and appropriately tailored to the needs of people with dementia and their carers, and to assess the feasibility of the intervention.ResultsThe importance of mental stimulation was emphasized by carers and people with dementia. People with dementia saw activities as a way of `keeping up to date¿ and spending time in a meaningful way. Carers reported benefits such as improved quality of life, mood and memory. The concept of iCST was well received, and both carers and people with dementia responded positively to the first drafts of materials. Feasibility issues, such as finding time to do sessions, were identified.ConclusionThe feedback from the focus groups and interviews will be used to further develop and refine the iCST programme materials in preparation for a field testing phase prior to a large scale randomized controlled trial (RCT).Trial registration ISRCTN65945963.Date of registration: 05/05/2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 104 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 103 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Researcher 9 9%
Other 7 7%
Other 22 21%
Unknown 19 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 33 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 12%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 21 20%
Attention Score in Context

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 25 March 2015.
All research outputs
#18,403,994
of 22,796,179 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,627
of 3,180 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,563
of 352,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#19
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,796,179 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,180 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. 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 352,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.