↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Reminiscence therapy for dementia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2005
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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
56 news outlets
blogs
12 blogs
twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
13 Wikipedia pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
442 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
386 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Reminiscence therapy for dementia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2005
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd001120.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bob Woods, Aimee E Spector, Catherine A Jones, Martin Orrell, Stephen P Davies

Abstract

Reminiscence Therapy (RT) involves the discussion of past activities, events and experiences with another person or group of people, usually with the aid of tangible prompts such as photographs, household and other familiar items from the past, music and archive sound recordings. Reminiscence groups typically involve group meetings in which participants are encouraged to talk about past events at least once a week. Life review typically involves individual sessions, in which the person is guided chronologically through life experiences, encouraged to evaluate them, and may produce a life story book. Family care-givers are increasingly involved in reminiscence therapy. Reminiscence therapy is one of the most popular psychosocial interventions in dementia care, and is highly rated by staff and participants. There is some evidence to suggest it is effective in improving mood in older people without dementia. Its effects on mood, cognition and well-being in dementia are less well understood.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 386 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 1%
France 2 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
India 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 374 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 67 17%
Student > Bachelor 66 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 15%
Researcher 46 12%
Student > Postgraduate 26 7%
Other 65 17%
Unknown 58 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 91 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 53 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 46 12%
Social Sciences 41 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 4%
Other 59 15%
Unknown 82 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 523. 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 05 December 2023.
All research outputs
#48,745
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#92
of 13,168 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40
of 72,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,168 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 72,218 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 98% of its contemporaries.