↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Withdrawal versus continuation of chronic antipsychotic drugs for behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people with dementia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
166 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
376 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Withdrawal versus continuation of chronic antipsychotic drugs for behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people with dementia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, March 2013
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007726.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tom Declercq, Mirko Petrovic, Majda Azermai, Robert Vander Stichele, An IM De Sutter, Mieke L van Driel, Thierry Christiaens

Abstract

Antipsychotic agents are often used to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in dementia, although the literature is sceptical about their long-term use for this indication. Their effectiveness is limited and there is concern about adverse effects, including higher mortality with long-term use. When behavioural strategies have failed and drug therapy is instituted, regular attempts to withdraw these drugs are recommended. Physicians, nurses and families of older people with dementia are often reluctant to try to stop antipsychotics, fearing deterioration of NPS. Strategies to reduce antipsychotic use have been proposed, but a systematic review of interventions aimed at withdrawal of antipsychotic agents in older people with dementia has not yet been performed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 53 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 376 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 <1%
United Kingdom 3 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 367 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 61 16%
Researcher 54 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 11%
Student > Bachelor 41 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 33 9%
Other 92 24%
Unknown 53 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 164 44%
Psychology 36 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 29 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 28 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 3%
Other 43 11%
Unknown 65 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 54. 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 26 November 2021.
All research outputs
#621,319
of 21,738,040 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,298
of 12,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,375
of 176,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#6
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,738,040 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,099 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 176,593 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.