↓ Skip to main content

A pilot randomised controlled trial of personalised care for depressed patients with symptomatic coronary heart disease in South London general practices: the UPBEAT-UK RCT protocol and recruitment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
169 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
A pilot randomised controlled trial of personalised care for depressed patients with symptomatic coronary heart disease in South London general practices: the UPBEAT-UK RCT protocol and recruitment
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-244x-12-58
Pubmed ID
Authors

André Tylee, Mark Haddad, Elizabeth Barley, Mark Ashworth, June Brown, John Chambers, Anne Farmer, Zoe Fortune, Rebecca Lawton, Morven Leese, Anthony Mann, Paul McCrone, Joanna Murray, Carmine Pariante, Rachel Phillips, Diana Rose, Gill Rowlands, Ramon Sabes-Figuera, Alison Smith, Paul Walters

Abstract

Community studies reveal people with coronary heart disease (CHD) are twice as likely to be depressed as the general population and that this co-morbidity negatively affects the course and outcome of both conditions. There is evidence for the efficacy of collaborative care and case management for depression treatment, and whilst NICE guidelines recommend these approaches only where depression has not responded to psychological, pharmacological, or combined treatments, these care approaches may be particularly relevant to the needs of people with CHD and depression in the earlier stages of stepped care in primary care settings.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 169 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Croatia 1 <1%
Unknown 163 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 33 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 16%
Student > Master 22 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 8%
Professor 9 5%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 37 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 47 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 21%
Social Sciences 12 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 5%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 45 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 2012.
All research outputs
#7,121,006
of 12,409,853 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#1,840
of 2,890 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,757
of 120,193 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,409,853 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 2,890 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. 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 120,193 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.