↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Horticultural therapy for schizophrenia

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
338 Mendeley
Title
Horticultural therapy for schizophrenia
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2014
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009413.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yan Liu, Bo Li, Stephanie J Sampson, Samantha Roberts, Guoyou Zhang, Weiping Wu

Abstract

Horticultural therapy is defined as the process of utilising fruits, vegetables, flowers and plants facilitated by a trained therapist or healthcare provider, to achieve specific treatment goals or to simply improve a person's well-being. It can be used for therapy or rehabilitation programs for cognitive, physical, social, emotional, and recreational benefits, thus improving the person's body, mind and spirit. Between 5% to 15% of people with schizophrenia continue to experience symptoms in spite of medication, and may also develop undesirable adverse effects, horticultural therapy may be of value for these people.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 338 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 337 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 59 17%
Student > Bachelor 39 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 11%
Researcher 31 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 21 6%
Other 43 13%
Unknown 108 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 60 18%
Psychology 48 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 45 13%
Social Sciences 21 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 2%
Other 40 12%
Unknown 116 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 07 February 2019.
All research outputs
#5,347,967
of 25,870,940 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#7,499
of 13,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,493
of 241,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#134
of 229 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,870,940 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,151 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 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 241,916 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 229 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.