↓ Skip to main content

Embedding telephone therapy in statutory mental health services: a qualitative, theory-driven analysis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
168 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
Embedding telephone therapy in statutory mental health services: a qualitative, theory-driven analysis
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12888-016-0761-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Penny Bee, Karina Lovell, Zerena Airnes, Anna Pruszynska

Abstract

Telephone-administered cognitive behavioural therapy (T-CBT) has attracted international recognition as a potential means of providing effective psychological treatment whilst simultaneously lowering costs, maximizing service efficiency and improving patient access to care. A lack of rigorous exploration of therapist perspectives means that little is known about professional readiness to adopt such delivery models, or the work that may be involved in ensuring successful implementation. This paper reports on a qualitative exploration of professional views of high intensity T-CBT. Semi-structured interviews with 18 UK accredited Cognitive Behavioural Therapists with nursing or allied health backgrounds were collected and analysed according to Normalisation Process Theory, a contemporary and empirically-derived theory of health technology implementation. Despite increasing research effort seeking to determine the effectiveness of T-CBT, the clinical rationale for its use remains insecure. Professional perceptions of T-CBT as a high risk delivery strategy emerge as a key factor delaying T-CBT routinisation in practice. T-CBT champions draw on experiential knowledge to demonstrate that remote services can add value, a key factor being the recognition that telephone-mediated services can provide viable access for hard to reach populations. T-CBT uptake will be facilitated by i) the modification of existing protocols to address new methods of exchanging information and data, and (ii) greater clarification of the reach and span of telephone therapies, including the most appropriate division of labour across different service levels and settings. The integration and normalisation of high intensity T-CBT into mental health services demands greater recognition and redress of the existing socio-technical matrices within which nursing and allied health practitioners work. The future spread of higher intensity T-CBT is contingent upon the willingness of service managers to support staff in the delivery and governance of non-face-to-face therapy models. Clear delineation of the role and scope of T-CBT and the extent to which it will extend or replace existing provision is required.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 168 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 167 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 24%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Researcher 10 6%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 50 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 38 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 13%
Social Sciences 10 6%
Computer Science 5 3%
Other 21 13%
Unknown 50 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 13 May 2016.
All research outputs
#8,110,924
of 25,035,235 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#2,824
of 5,337 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,096
of 304,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#51
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,035,235 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,337 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 304,467 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 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.