↓ Skip to main content

Potential Benefits of Incorporating Peer-to-Peer Interactions Into Digital Interventions for Psychotic Disorders: A Systematic Review

Overview of attention for article published in Psychiatric Services, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
26 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
194 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
Potential Benefits of Incorporating Peer-to-Peer Interactions Into Digital Interventions for Psychotic Disorders: A Systematic Review
Published in
Psychiatric Services, December 2017
DOI 10.1176/appi.ps.201700283
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruno Biagianti, Sophia H Quraishi, Danielle A Schlosser

Abstract

Peer-to-peer interactions and support groups mitigate experiences of social isolation and loneliness often reported by individuals with psychotic disorders. Online peer-to-peer communication can promote broader use of this form of social support. Peer-to-peer interactions occur naturally on social media platforms, but they can negatively affect mental health. Recent digital interventions for persons with psychotic disorders have harnessed the principles of social media to incorporate peer-to-peer communication. This review examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of recent digital interventions in order to identify strategies to maximize benefits of online peer-to-peer communication for persons with psychotic disorders. An electronic database search of PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Health Technology Assessment Database was conducted in February 2017 and yielded a total of 1,015 results. Eight publications that reported data from six independent trials and five interventions were reviewed. The technology supporting peer-to-peer communication varied greatly across studies, from online forums to embedded social networking. When peer-to-peer interactions were moderated by facilitators, retention, engagement, acceptability, and efficacy were higher than for interventions with no facilitators. Individuals with psychotic disorders were actively engaged with moderated peer-to-peer communication and showed improvements in perceived social support. Studies involving service users in intervention design showed higher rates of acceptability. Individuals with psychotic disorders value and benefit from digital interventions that include moderated peer-to-peer interactions. Incorporating peer-to-peer communication into digital interventions for this population may increase compliance with other evidence-based therapies by producing more acceptable and engaging online environments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 26 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 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 194 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 10%
Student > Bachelor 18 9%
Student > Master 17 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Other 28 14%
Unknown 70 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 45 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 16 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 8%
Social Sciences 10 5%
Computer Science 8 4%
Other 20 10%
Unknown 80 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#1,658,042
of 25,998,826 outputs
Outputs from Psychiatric Services
#500
of 4,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,312
of 450,901 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychiatric Services
#6
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,998,826 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 450,901 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.