| Title |
Uptake of Web-Based Clinical Resources from the MacArthur Initiative on Depression and Primary Care
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Community Mental Health Journal, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10597-011-9461-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Changsu Han, Corrine I. Voils, John W. Williams |
| Abstract |
This study assessed the usability and desired enhancements for the MacArthur Foundation's Depression and Primary Care (MDPC) Web site to determine if resources for integrated depression care that are disseminated through the Web site are incorporated into routine clinical care. Since its launch in 2003, more than 20,000 users registered as members of the MDPC website to read and download depression care resources. Subjects were randomly selected from MDPC Web site users who had previously downloaded the depression toolkit. Web-based survey, which was administered anonymously, included the following domains: (1) socio-demographic data, (2) confidence in managing depression (3) Web site content and design features, (4) desired enhancements to Web site and content, (5) use of resources downloaded from the Web site, and (6) importance of depression care resources. Of the 3,478 randomly selected participants, 666 (19.1%) responded. Web site content was rated "good" or "excellent" for screening and diagnosis (84.3%), treatment (69.8%), patient education (66.2%), and care management (66.9%). The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) was rated "very useful" by 68.3%; 47.1% reported using it in at least 25% of encounters with patients who are depressed. PHQ-9 use was significantly associated with higher self-confidence in managing depression (P = 0.05). Evidence-based resources for depression care can be disseminated effectively through a dedicated Web site and may help clinicians incorporate effective care models into routine practice. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Norway | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 18% |
| Researcher | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 20% |
| Unknown | 10 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 15 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 13 | 21% |
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 03 July 2015.
All research outputs
#7,410,276
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from Community Mental Health Journal
#373
of 1,279 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,877
of 140,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Community Mental Health Journal
#6
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 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 1,279 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 140,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.