↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Yoga versus non-standard care for schizophrenia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2017
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 (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

39 tweeters
5 Facebook pages
3 Wikipedia pages
1 Q&A thread


16 Dimensions

Readers on

381 Mendeley
Yoga versus non-standard care for schizophrenia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2017
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd012052.pub2
Pubmed ID

Julie Broderick, Niall Crumlish, Alice Waugh, Davy Vancampfort


Yoga is an ancient spiritual practice that originated in India and is currently accepted in the Western world as a form of relaxation and exercise. It has been of interest for people with schizophrenia as an alternative or adjunctive treatment. To systematically assess the effects of yoga versus non-standard care for people with schizophrenia. The Information Specialist of the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group searched their specialised Trials Register (latest 30 March 2017), which is based on regular searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, BIOSIS, AMED, PsycINFO, and registries of clinical trials. We searched the references of all included studies. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records in the register. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) including people with schizophrenia and comparing yoga with non-standard care. We included trials that met our selection criteria and reported useable data. The review team independently selected studies, assessed quality, and extracted data. For binary outcomes, we calculated risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) between groups and its 95% CI. We employed a fixed-effect models for analyses. We examined data for heterogeneity (I(2) technique), assessed risk of bias for included studies, and created a 'Summary of findings' table for seven main outcomes of interest using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). We were able to include six studies (586 participants). Non-standard care consisted solely of another type of exercise programme. All outcomes were short term (less than six months). There was a clear difference in the outcome leaving the study early (6 RCTs, n=586, RR 0.64 CI 0.49 to 0.83, medium quality evidence) in favour of the yoga group. There were no clear differences between groups for the remaining outcomes. These included mental state (improvement in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, 1 RCT, n=84, RR 0.81 CI 0.62 to 1.07, low quality evidence), social functioning (improvement in Social Occupational Functioning Scale, 1 RCT, n=84, RR 0.90 CI 0.78 to 1.04, low quality evidence), quality of life (mental health) (average change 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36) quality-of-life sub-scale, 1 RCT, n=69, MD -5.30 CI -17.78 to 7.18, low quality evidence), physical health, (average change WHOQOL-BREF physical-health sub-scale, 1 RCT, n=69, MD 9.22 CI -0.42 to 18.86, low quality evidence). Only one study reported adverse effects, finding no incidence of adverse events in either treatment group. There were a considerable number of missing outcomes, which included relapse, change in cognition, costs of care, effect on standard care, service intervention, disability, and activities of daily living. We found minimal differences between yoga and non-standard care, the latter consisting of another exercise comparator, which could be broadly considered aerobic exercise. Outcomes were largely based on single studies with limited sample sizes and short-term follow-up. Overall, many outcomes were not reported and evidence presented in this review is of low to moderate quality - too weak to indicate that yoga is superior or inferior to non-standard care control for management of people with schizophrenia.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 39 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 381 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 381 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 67 18%
Student > Bachelor 53 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 11%
Researcher 29 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 6%
Other 59 15%
Unknown 110 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 70 18%
Nursing and Health Professions 54 14%
Psychology 47 12%
Social Sciences 19 5%
Unspecified 11 3%
Other 55 14%
Unknown 125 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 32. 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 24 April 2020.
All research outputs
of 19,574,987 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 11,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
of 291,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
of 247 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 19,574,987 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% 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 291,081 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 247 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.