| Title |
‘Big data’ in mental health research: current status and emerging possibilities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00127-016-1266-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert Stewart, Katrina Davis |
| Abstract |
'Big data' are accumulating in a multitude of domains and offer novel opportunities for research. The role of these resources in mental health investigations remains relatively unexplored, although a number of datasets are in use and supporting a range of projects. We sought to review big data resources and their use in mental health research to characterise applications to date and consider directions for innovation in future. A narrative review. Clear disparities were evident in geographic regions covered and in the disorders and interventions receiving most attention. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the use of different types of data and the challenges of big data in general. Current research output from big data is still predominantly determined by the information and resources available and there is a need to reverse the situation so that big data platforms are more driven by the needs of clinical services and service users. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 2 | 18% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 9% |
| Germany | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 7 | 64% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 36% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 27% |
| Scientists | 3 | 27% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 264 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 260 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 44 | 17% |
| Researcher | 43 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 6% |
| Other | 55 | 21% |
| Unknown | 52 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 48 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 24 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 11 | 4% |
| Other | 51 | 19% |
| Unknown | 72 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 20 January 2019.
All research outputs
#4,458,018
of 23,972,269 outputs
Outputs from Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
#859
of 2,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,541
of 371,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
#12
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,972,269 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 371,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 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.