| Title |
Pharmacological interventions for self‐injurious behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd009084.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fareez Rana, Aynur Gormez, Susan Varghese |
| Abstract |
Self-injurious behaviour among people with intellectual disability is relatively common and often persistent. Self-injurious behaviour continues to present a challenge to clinicians. It remains poorly understood and difficult to ameliorate despite advances in neurobiology and psychological therapies. There is a strong need for a better evidence base in prescribing and monitoring of drugs in this population, especially since none of the drugs are actually licensed for self-injurious behaviour. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 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 241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 241 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 34 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 28 | 12% |
| Researcher | 27 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 15 | 6% |
| Other | 47 | 20% |
| Unknown | 69 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 64 | 27% |
| Psychology | 26 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 21 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 18 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 3% |
| Other | 26 | 11% |
| Unknown | 78 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 May 2015.
All research outputs
#6,928,749
of 25,891,484 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#8,368
of 13,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,846
of 205,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#164
of 263 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,891,484 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 205,601 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 263 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.