↓ Skip to main content

Group hypnotherapy versus group relaxation for smoking cessation: an RCT study protocol

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2012
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 (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
Group hypnotherapy versus group relaxation for smoking cessation: an RCT study protocol
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-12-271
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria Dickson-Spillmann, Thomas Kraemer, Kristina Rust, Michael Schaub

Abstract

A significant number of smokers would like to stop smoking. Despite the demonstrated efficacy of pharmacological smoking cessation treatments, many smokers are unwilling to use them; however, they are inclined to try alternative methods. Hypnosis has a long-standing reputation in smoking cessation therapy, but its efficacy has not been scientifically proven. We designed this randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effects of group hypnosis as a method for smoking cessation, and we will compare the results of group hypnosis with group relaxation.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Norway 1 <1%
Ecuador 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 114 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 24 20%
Researcher 15 13%
Student > Master 15 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 8%
Other 23 19%
Unknown 18 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 5%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 17 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 02 March 2013.
All research outputs
#1,737,463
of 12,372,633 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#2,005
of 8,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,646
of 117,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#5
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,372,633 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,418 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 117,977 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.