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 |
Assessment of functioning in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder with the Mini-ICF-APP: a validation study in Italy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Mental Health Systems, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13033-015-0030-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Federica Pinna, Andrea Fiorillo, Massimo Tusconi, Beatrice Guiso, Bernardo Carpiniello |
| Abstract |
The aim of the study was to evaluate validity of the Italian Mini-ICF-APP (Mini-ICF Rating for Limitations of Activities and Participation in Psychological Disorders) in schizophrenia and related disorders. 74 outpatients affected by schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorders attending a University-based community mental health centre were recruited to the study. All participants underwent comprehensive evaluation using standardized instruments to assess clinical, neurocognitive and functional status. Concurrent validity of Mini-ICF-APP was evaluated and compared to severity scores obtained using the Clinical Global Impression-Schizophrenia scale (CGI-SCH), Positive and Negative Syndrome scale (PANSS), Mini Mental State Examination test (MMSE), Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia scale (BACS) and Personal and Social Performance scale (PSP). Construct validity was evaluated by comparing scores obtained at Mini-ICF-APP by remitted versus non-remitted patients, and by recovered versus unrecovered patients. Discriminant validity was evaluated comparing scores on Mini-ICF-APP and Subjective Well-being (SWN) scale. the total score and 12 out of the 13 Mini-ICF-APP items correlated significantly with total score at PSP; Mini-ICF-App total score was moreover significantly correlated with total scores at CGI-SCH, PANSS, MMSE, as well as with several BACS items. Total scores obtained at Mini-ICF-APP were significantly higher among remitted and recovered patients. No relevant correlations were found between scores of Mini-ICF-APP and SWN scales. The total score and 12 out of the 13 Mini-ICF-APP items correlated significantly with total score at PSP; Mini-ICF-App total score was moreover significantly correlated with total scores at CGI-SCH, PANSS, MMSE, as well as with several BACS items. Total scores obtained at Mini-ICF-APP were significantly higher among remitted and recovered patients. No relevant correlations were found between scores of Mini-ICF-APP and SWN scales. the Italian version of Mini-ICF-APP is a valid instrument for use in evaluating functioning in chronic patients with schizophrenia and related disorders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 20% |
| Unknown | 4 | 80% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 65 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 18 | 28% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 22 | 34% |
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 24 December 2015.
All research outputs
#13,099,668
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#452
of 718 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,199
of 284,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Mental Health Systems
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 718 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. 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 284,235 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.