↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2010
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 (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
201 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
373 Mendeley
Title
Shared decision making interventions for people with mental health conditions
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2010
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd007297.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward Duncan, Catherine Best, Suzanne Hagen

Abstract

One person in every four will suffer from a diagnosable mental health condition during their life course. Such conditions can have a devastating impact on the lives of the individual, their family and society. Increasingly partnership models of mental health care have been advocated and enshrined in international healthcare policy. Shared decision making is one such partnership approach. Shared decision making is a form of patient-provider communication where both parties are acknowledged to bring expertise to the process and work in partnership to make a decision. This is advocated on the basis that patients have a right to self-determination and also in the expectation that it will increase treatment adherence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 373 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 2%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Spain 2 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Unknown 354 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 77 21%
Student > Master 56 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 14%
Student > Bachelor 35 9%
Student > Postgraduate 25 7%
Other 74 20%
Unknown 53 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 99 27%
Psychology 77 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 55 15%
Social Sciences 32 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 2%
Other 35 9%
Unknown 69 18%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 14 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,387,662
of 17,360,236 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,528
of 11,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,190
of 312,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#91
of 248 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,360,236 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,660 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 312,295 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 248 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 63% of its contemporaries.