↓ Skip to main content

What happens for informal caregivers during transition to increased levels of care for the person with dementia? A systematic review protocol

Overview of attention for article published in Systematic Reviews, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
What happens for informal caregivers during transition to increased levels of care for the person with dementia? A systematic review protocol
Published in
Systematic Reviews, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13643-018-0755-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marianne Cranwell, Anna Gavine, Linda McSwiggan, Timothy B. Kelly

Abstract

Dementia is a globally prevalent disease that requires ongoing and increasing levels of care, often provided in the first instance by informal caregivers. Supporting transitions in informal caregiving in dementia is a pertinent issue for caregivers, care providers and governments. There is no existing systematic review that seeks to identify and map the body of literature regarding the review question: 'What happens for informal caregivers during transition to increased levels of care for the person with dementia?' ASSIA, CINAHL+, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SCIE, Social Service Abstracts and Web of Science will be systematically searched. Specialist dementia research libraries will be contacted. Reviews identified as relevant during the search process, their reference lists, and reference lists of accepted papers will be hand-searched. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies that seek to represent the experiences of, or examine the impact upon, informal caregivers during transition to increased formal care for the person with dementia will be eligible for inclusion. Synthesis will be segregated into qualitative and quantitative papers. Findings will be summarised, and the review will be prepared for publication. The review will seek to identify potentially vulnerable groups in need of support and as such, inform the practice of those offering support. It will also inform future research by highlighting areas in which current literature is insubstantial. PROSPERO CRD42017067248.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Lecturer 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 19 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Psychology 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 20 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 12 February 2019.
All research outputs
#3,705,811
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Systematic Reviews
#704
of 2,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,313
of 329,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Systematic Reviews
#25
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,010 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 gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 329,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.