| Title |
ACT and Recovery: Integrating Evidence-Based Practice and Recovery Orientation on Assertive Community Treatment Teams
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Community Mental Health Journal, May 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10597-007-9088-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michelle P. Salyers, Sam Tsemberis |
| Abstract |
We examine whether Assertive Community Treatment (ACT), a widely implemented and rigorously studied practice, can successfully incorporate a recovery-oriented approach while continuing to retain program fidelity. We briefly review the effectiveness of ACT as an evidence-based practice, with a focus on adaptations to changing populations and contexts. We explore philosophical similarities and differences between ACT and recovery and examine how fidelity standards, a widely used indicator of how ACT teams operate, support or interfere with the adoption of a recovery-oriented practice. Finally, we provide recommendations on how best to incorporate a recovery orientation into existing ACT teams. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| Finland | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 139 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 28 | 19% |
| Researcher | 26 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 12 | 8% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 37 | 25% |
| Unknown | 15 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 44 | 29% |
| Social Sciences | 41 | 27% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 28 | 19% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 4% |
| Arts and Humanities | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 6% |
| Unknown | 18 | 12% |
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 19 June 2014.
All research outputs
#18,373,874
of 22,757,541 outputs
Outputs from Community Mental Health Journal
#1,129
of 1,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,840
of 70,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Community Mental Health Journal
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,541 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 70,691 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.