↓ Skip to main content

Electronic personal health records for people with severe mental illness; a feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 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
Electronic personal health records for people with severe mental illness; a feasibility study
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0558-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dan Robotham, Matthew Mayhew, Diana Rose, Til Wykes

Abstract

Electronic Patient Health Records (ePHRs) contain information created, accessed, monitored and maintained by patients. This paper describes how an ePHR called myhealthlocker™ was used by people with severe mental illness to monitor and input their own health-related outcomes, and whether they derived any benefit from it. Individuals using local secondary mental health services were provided with access to myhealthlocker, an ePHR which allowed them to monitor their health and input information from Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) across to their clinical record. Participants were given support to use myhealthlocker through drop-in sessions facilitated by an Occupational Therapist. Usage of the site was monitored over time. Surveys and interviews were used to investigate what participants thought about the intervention. 32 of 58 participants used the ePHR (where usage was defined by logging in at least twice and completing a PROM). Almost all participants who used the site had been referred from community rather than inpatient services. Of those who used the site, 26 out of 32 used it primarily or exclusively through supported drop-in sessions. Almost half of those participants who used the site had used it outside the drop-in sessions. Those who used the site found it useful (n = 32), and most said they would continue to use it (n = 27). There were no apparent differences in usage across gender, diagnosis, and length of service use history. Suggestions for improvement included a social networking component, and finding ways to engage clinicians. In particular, users valued the ability to monitor health outcomes over time. People with severe mental illness were able to use an ePHR and derive benefit from monitoring and inputting PROMs. Those who use the site are more likely to have been referred from community mental health services, and then supported to access the ePHR.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 3%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 153 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 30 19%
Researcher 22 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 11%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Other 23 15%
Unknown 38 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 19%
Psychology 22 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 13%
Computer Science 16 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Other 18 11%
Unknown 46 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 August 2015.
All research outputs
#14,705,583
of 24,160,198 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#3,186
of 5,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,739
of 268,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#59
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,160,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,064 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 268,348 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.