↓ Skip to main content

Clinical predictors of severe behavioural problems in people with intellectual disabilities referred to a specialist mental health service

Overview of attention for article published in Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, May 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Clinical predictors of severe behavioural problems in people with intellectual disabilities referred to a specialist mental health service
Published in
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, May 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00127-008-0370-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Colin P. Hemmings, Elias Tsakanikos, Lisa Underwood, Geraldine Holt, Nick Bouras

Abstract

Associations between demographic and clinical variables and severe behavioural problems in people with intellectual disabilities were examined in a cross-sectional survey of 408 adults consecutively referred to a specialist mental health service. Severe behavioural problems were present in 136 (33.3%) of the sample. The demographic and clinical predictors of severe behavioural problems in this sample were identified by logistic regression. Age and gender were not associated with severe behavioural problems. The presence of severe ID independently predicted the presence of severe behavioural problems. Schizophrenia spectrum disorders and personality disorders independently predicted the presence of severe behavioural problems, whereas the presence of an anxiety disorder independently predicted their absence. There is an increasing evidence base of relationships between mental disorders and behavioural problems in people with ID although the pattern of these relationships remains unclear.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 26%
Student > Master 4 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 7 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 9%
Social Sciences 2 9%
Philosophy 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 17 August 2015.
All research outputs
#7,845,540
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
#1,318
of 2,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,398
of 84,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
#10
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,534 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 84,683 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.