↓ Skip to main content

Movement side effects of antipsychotic drugs in adults with and without intellectual disability: UK population-based cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in BMJ Open, August 2017
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
40 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Movement side effects of antipsychotic drugs in adults with and without intellectual disability: UK population-based cohort study
Published in
BMJ Open, August 2017
DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017406
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rory Sheehan, Laura Horsfall, André Strydom, David Osborn, Kate Walters, Angela Hassiotis

Abstract

To measure the incidence of movement side effects of antipsychotic drugs in adults with intellectual disability and compare rates with adults without intellectual disability. Cohort study using data from The Health Improvement Network. UK primary care. Adults with intellectual disability prescribed antipsychotic drugs matched to a control group of adults without intellectual disability prescribed antipsychotic drugs. New records of movement side effect including acute dystonias, akathisia, parkinsonism, tardive dyskinaesia and neuroleptic malignant syndrome. 9013 adults with intellectual disability and a control cohort of 34 242 adults without intellectual disability together contributed 148 709 person-years data. The overall incidence of recorded movement side effects was 275 per 10 000 person-years (95% CI 256 to 296) in the intellectual disability group and 248 per 10 000 person-years (95% CI 237 to 260) in the control group. The incidence of any recorded movement side effect was significantly greater in people with intellectual disability compared with those without (incidence rate ratio 1.30, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.42, p<0.001, after adjustment for potential confounders), with parkinsonism and akathisia showing the greatest difference between the groups. Neuroleptic malignant syndrome, although occurring infrequently, was three times more common in people with intellectual disability-prescribed antipsychotic drugs (incidence rate ratio 3.03, 95% CI 1.26 to 7.30, p=0.013). Differences in rates of movement side effects between the groups were not due to differences in the proportions prescribed first and second-generation antipsychotic drugs. This study provides evidence to substantiate the long-held assumption that people with intellectual disability are more susceptible to movement side effects of antipsychotic drugs. Assessment for movement side effects should be integral to antipsychotic drug monitoring in people with intellectual disability. Regular medication review is essential to ensure optimal prescribing in this group.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 40 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Other 6 8%
Other 17 21%
Unknown 21 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 11%
Psychology 8 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 8%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 25 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 34. 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 27 February 2022.
All research outputs
#1,189,323
of 25,654,806 outputs
Outputs from BMJ Open
#2,117
of 25,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,543
of 327,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMJ Open
#63
of 642 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,654,806 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25,850 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 327,993 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 642 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 90% of its contemporaries.