| Title |
Frequent visitors at the psychiatric emergency room – A literature review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychiatric Quarterly, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11126-017-9509-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Manuela Schmidt |
| Abstract |
Frequent visitors at the psychiatric emergency room (PER) constitute a small subgroup of patients, yet they are responsible for a disproportionate number of visits and thus claim considerable resources. Their needs are often left unmet and their repetitive visits reflect their dissatisfaction as well as that of PERs' staff. Motivated by these dilemmas, this study systematically reviews the literature about frequent visitors at PER and seeks to answer two questions: What characterizes frequent visitors at PER in the literature? and What characterizes PER in the literature? Based on 29 studies, this paper offers answers to the two questions based on a strength weakness opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis. The results of the review and subsequent analysis of the literature revealed the multiplicity and complexity of frequent visitors' characteristics and how they appear to converge. Commonalities were more difficult to identify in PER characteristics. In some cases, this happened because the characteristics were poorly described or were context specific. As a result, it was not easy to compare the studies on PER. Based on SWOT and the findings of the analysis, the paper proposes new venues of research and suggests how the field of mental health might develop by taking into account its opportunities and threats. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 11% |
| Psychology | 4 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 13 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,864,450
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Psychiatric Quarterly
#428
of 632 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,465
of 309,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychiatric Quarterly
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 632 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 309,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.