↓ Skip to main content

Psychosocial group intervention to enhance self-management skills of people with dementia and their caregivers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
331 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Psychosocial group intervention to enhance self-management skills of people with dementia and their caregivers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, August 2012
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-13-133
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marja-Liisa Laakkonen, Eeva H Hölttä, Niina Savikko, Timo E Strandberg, Merja Suominen, Kaisu H Pitkälä

Abstract

After diagnosis of a dementing illness, patients and their spouses have many concerns related to the disease and their future. This often leads to poor psychological well-being and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of the family. Support for self-management skills has been proven to be an effective method to improve prognosis of asthma, heart failure and osteoarthritis. However, self-management interventions have not been studied in dementia. Therefore, our aim was to examine, in an objective-oriented group intervention, the efficacy of self-management support program (SMP) on the HRQoL of dementia patients and their spousal caregivers as well as on the sense of competence and psychological well-being of caregivers.

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 331 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
United States 2 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 323 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 55 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 51 15%
Researcher 44 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 9%
Student > Bachelor 28 8%
Other 55 17%
Unknown 69 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 68 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 57 17%
Nursing and Health Professions 50 15%
Social Sciences 20 6%
Unspecified 10 3%
Other 41 12%
Unknown 85 26%

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 29 January 2016.
All research outputs
#13,018,325
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Trials
#3,059
of 5,819 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,045
of 166,600 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trials
#24
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 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 5,819 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. 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 166,600 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.