↓ Skip to main content

What do we know about the risks for young people moving into, through and out of inpatient mental health care? Findings from an evidence synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
128 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 do we know about the risks for young people moving into, through and out of inpatient mental health care? Findings from an evidence synthesis
Published in
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13034-015-0087-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Deborah Edwards, Nicola Evans, Elizabeth Gillen, Mirella Longo, Steven Pryjmachuk, Gemma Trainor, Ben Hannigan

Abstract

Young people with complex or severe mental health needs sometimes require care and treatment in inpatient settings. There are risks for young people in this care context, and this study addressed the question: 'What is known about the identification, assessment and management of risk in young people (aged 11-18) with complex mental health needs entering, using and exiting inpatient child and adolescent mental health services in the UK?' In phase 1 a scoping search of two electronic databases (MEDLINE and PsychINFO) was undertaken. Items included were themed and presented to members of a stakeholder advisory group, who were asked to help prioritise the focus for phase 2. In phase 2, 17 electronic databases (EconLit; ASSIA; BNI; Cochrane Library; CINAHL; ERIC; EMBASE; HMIC; MEDLINE; PsycINFO; Scopus; Social Care Online; Social Services Abstracts; Sociological Abstracts; OpenGrey; TRiP; and Web of Science) were searched. Websites were explored and a call for evidence was circulated to locate items related to the risks to young people in mental health hospitals relating to 'dislocation' and 'contagion'. All types of evidence including research, policies and service and practice responses relating to outcomes, views and experiences, costs and cost-effectiveness were considered. Materials identified were narratively synthesised. In phase 1, 4539 citations were found and 124 items included. Most were concerned with clinical risks. In phase 2, 15,662 citations were found, and 40 addressing the risks of 'dislocation' and 'contagion' were included supplemented by 20 policy and guidance documents. The quality of studies varied. Materials were synthesised using the categories: Dislocation: Normal Life; Dislocation: Identity; Dislocation: Friends; Dislocation: Stigma; Dislocation: Education; Dislocation: Families; and Contagion. No studies included an economic analysis. Although we found evidence of consideration of risk to young people in these areas we found little evidence to improve practice and services. The importance to stakeholders of the risks of 'dislocation' and 'contagion' contrasted with the limited quantity and quality of evidence to inform policy, services and practice. The risks of dislocation and contagion are important, but new research is needed to inform how staff might identify, assess and manage them.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 126 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 18%
Researcher 20 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 31 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 27%
Social Sciences 19 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 10 8%
Unknown 35 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,581,969
of 25,789,020 outputs
Outputs from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#120
of 798 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,293
of 398,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,789,020 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 798 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 398,860 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them