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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Involving relatives in relapse prevention for bipolar disorder: a multi-perspective qualitative study of value and barriers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Psychiatry, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-244x-11-172 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah Peters, Eleanor Pontin, Fiona Lobban, Richard Morriss |
| Abstract |
Managing early warning signs is an effective approach to preventing relapse in bipolar disorder. Involving relatives in relapse prevention has been shown to maximize the effectiveness of this approach. However, family-focused intervention research has typically used expert therapists, who are rarely available within routine clinical services. It remains unknown what issues exist when involving relatives in relapse prevention planning delivered by community mental health case managers. This study explored the value and barriers of involving relatives in relapse prevention from the perspectives of service users, relatives and care-coordinators. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 116 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 26 | 22% |
| Researcher | 18 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 16% |
| Unknown | 23 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 40 | 34% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 12 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 26 | 22% |
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 10 April 2012.
All research outputs
#13,357,126
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#2,774
of 4,629 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,346
of 141,726 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#23
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,629 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 141,726 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.