↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Clozapine for psychotic disorders in adults with intellectual disabilities

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
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 (90th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
26 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
166 Mendeley
Title
Clozapine for psychotic disorders in adults with intellectual disabilities
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, September 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010625.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muhammad Ayub, Khalid Saeed, Tariq A Munshi, Farooq Naeem

Abstract

Psychosis is three times more common in people with an intellectual disability than in those without an intellectual disability. A low intelligence quotient (IQ) is a defining characteristic for intellectual disability and a risk factor for poor outcome in psychosis. Clozapine is recommended for treatment-resistant psychosis. The effect of psychotropic medication can be different in people with intellectual disability; for example, they may be more prone to side effects. People with an intellectual disability and psychosis form a special subgroup and we wanted to examine if there is randomised controlled trial (RCT) data in this population to support the use of clozapine. To determine the effects of clozapine for treating adults with a dual diagnosis of intellectual disability and psychosis. We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and eight other databases up to December 2014. We also searched two trials registers, the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register of Trials, and contacted the manufacturers of clozapine. RCTs that assessed the effects of clozapine, at any dose, for treating adults (aged 18 years and over) with a dual diagnosis of intellectual disability and psychotic disorder, compared with placebo or another antipsychotic medication. Three review authors independently screened all titles, abstracts and any relevant full-text reports against the inclusion criteria. Of the 1224 titles and abstracts screened, we shortlisted 38 full-text articles, which we subsequently excluded as they did not meet the inclusion criteria. These studies were not RCTs. Consequently, no studies are included in this Cochrane review. There are currently no RCTs that assess the efficacy and side effects of clozapine in people with intellectual disabilities and psychoses. Given the use of clozapine in this vulnerable population, there is an urgent need for a RCT of clozapine in people with a dual diagnosis of intellectual disability and psychosis to fill the evidence gap.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 166 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 165 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 31 19%
Researcher 22 13%
Student > Bachelor 21 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 8%
Other 29 17%
Unknown 30 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 47 28%
Psychology 21 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 10%
Social Sciences 11 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 5%
Other 25 15%
Unknown 38 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 23 October 2019.
All research outputs
#1,456,368
of 18,455,809 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#3,591
of 11,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,646
of 257,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#107
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,455,809 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,836 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.9. 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 257,563 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 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 59% of its contemporaries.