| Title |
An organizing framework for informal caregiver interventions: detailing caregiving activities and caregiver and care recipient outcomes to optimize evaluation efforts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Geriatrics, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2318-11-77 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Courtney Harold Van Houtven, Corrine I Voils, Morris Weinberger |
| Abstract |
Caregiver interventions may help improve the quality of informal care. Yet the lack of a systematic framework specifying the targets and outcomes of caregiver interventions hampers our ability to understand what has been studied, to evaluate existing programs, and to inform the design of future programs. Our goal was to develop an organizing framework detailing the components of the caregiving activities and the caregiver and care recipient outcomes that should be affected by an intervention. In so doing, we characterize what has been measured in the published literature to date and what should be measured in future studies to enable comparisons across interventions and across time. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 136 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 18% |
| Unknown | 42 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 20 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 16 | 11% |
| Psychology | 12 | 8% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 22 | 15% |
| Unknown | 45 | 32% |
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 13 December 2011.
All research outputs
#20,152,153
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Geriatrics
#2,828
of 3,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#217,751
of 239,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Geriatrics
#27
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 239,433 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.