↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of a community awareness programme to reduce delays in referrals to early intervention services and enhance early detection of psychosis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Psychiatry, May 2015
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
25 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
202 Mendeley
Title
Evaluation of a community awareness programme to reduce delays in referrals to early intervention services and enhance early detection of psychosis
Published in
BMC Psychiatry, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12888-015-0485-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brynmor Lloyd-Evans, Angela Sweeney, Mark Hinton, Nicola Morant, Stephen Pilling, Judy Leibowitz, Helen Killaspy, Sanna Tanskanen, Jonathan Totman, Jessica Armstrong, Sonia Johnson

Abstract

Reducing treatment delay and coercive pathways to care are accepted aims for Early Intervention Services (EIS) for people experiencing first episode psychosis but how to achieve this is unclear. A one-year community awareness programme was implemented in a London EIS team, targeting staff in non-health service community organisations. The programme comprised psycho-educational workshops and EIS link workers, and offering direct referral routes to EIS. Its feasibility and its impact on duration of untreated psychosis and pathways to EIS were evaluated. Evaluation comprised: pre and post questionnaires with workshop participants assessing knowledge and attitudes to psychosis and mental health services; and a comparison of new service users' "service DUP"(time from first psychotic symptom to first contact with EIS) and pathways to care in the intervention year and preceding year. Focus groups sought stakeholders' views regarding the benefits and limitations of the programme and what else might promote help-seeking. 41 workshops at 36 community organisations were attended by 367 staff. 19 follow up workshops were conducted and 16 services were allocated an EIS link worker. Participants' knowledge and attitudes to psychosis and attitudes to mental health services improved significantly following workshops. In the year of the intervention, only 6 of 110 new service users reached EIS directly via community organisations. For all new referrals accepted by EIS, in the intervention year compared to the previous year, there was no difference in mean or median service DUP. A clear impact on pathways to care could not be discerned. Stakeholders suggested that barriers to referral remained. These included: uncertainty about the signs of early psychosis, disengagement by young people when becoming unwell, and worries about stigma or coercive treatment from mental health services. More general, youth focused, mental health services were proposed. The community awareness programme did not reduce treatment delays for people experiencing first episode psychosis. Further research is needed regarding effective means to reduce duration of untreated psychosis. Although EIS services are guided to promote access through community engagement, this may not be an effective use of their limited resources. Current Controlled Trial ISRCTN98260910 Registered 19th May 2010.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 199 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 21%
Researcher 27 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Student > Postgraduate 10 5%
Other 43 21%
Unknown 38 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 68 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 12%
Social Sciences 21 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 8%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Other 12 6%
Unknown 55 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 02 June 2015.
All research outputs
#2,149,596
of 23,306,612 outputs
Outputs from BMC Psychiatry
#767
of 4,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,750
of 265,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Psychiatry
#9
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,306,612 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,810 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 265,431 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.