↓ Skip to main content

Does screening for and intervening with multiple health compromising behaviours and mental health disorders amongst young people attending primary care improve health outcomes? A systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Primary Care, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
283 Mendeley
Title
Does screening for and intervening with multiple health compromising behaviours and mental health disorders amongst young people attending primary care improve health outcomes? A systematic review
Published in
BMC Primary Care, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12875-016-0504-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marianne J. Webb, Sylvia D. Kauer, Elizabeth M. Ozer, Dagmar M. Haller, Lena A. Sanci

Abstract

Adolescence and young adulthood are important developmental periods. Screening for health compromising behaviours and mental health disorders during routine primary care visits has the potential to assist clinicians to identify areas of concern and provide appropriate interventions. The objective of this systematic review is to investigate whether screening and subsequent interventions for multiple health compromising behaviours and mental health disorders in primary care settings improves the health outcomes of young people. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, literature searches were conducted in Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases (Prospero registration number CRD42013005828) using search terms representing four thematic concepts: primary care, young people, screening, and mental health and health compromising behaviour. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to: include a measure of health outcome; include at least 75 % of participants aged under 25 years; use a screening tool that assessed more than one health domain; and be conducted within a primary care setting. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Rating Scale. From 5051 articles identified, nine studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were reviewed: two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), one pilot RCT, two clustered RCTs, one randomised study with multiple intervention groups and no control group, one cluster RCT with two active arms, one longitudinal study and one pre-post study. Seven studies, including two RCTs and one clustered RCT, found positive changes in substance use, diet, sexual health or risky sexual behaviour, alcohol-related risky behaviour, social stress, stress management, helmet use, sleep and exercise. Of only two studies reporting on harms, one reported a negative health outcome of increased alcohol use. There is some evidence that the use of screening and intervention with young people for mental health disorder or health compromising behaviours in clinical settings improves health outcomes. Along with other evidence that young people value discussions of health risks with their providers, these discussions should be part of the routine primary care of young people. Further quality studies are needed to strengthen this evidence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 283 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 280 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 53 19%
Researcher 35 12%
Student > Bachelor 28 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 7%
Student > Postgraduate 15 5%
Other 40 14%
Unknown 93 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 19%
Nursing and Health Professions 34 12%
Psychology 32 11%
Social Sciences 15 5%
Sports and Recreations 9 3%
Other 32 11%
Unknown 106 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 April 2018.
All research outputs
#14,784,639
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Primary Care
#1,301
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,822
of 381,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Primary Care
#33
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 381,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.