↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Assessing the distinctiveness of psychotherapies and examining change over treatment for anorexia nervosa with cognitive‐behavior therapy, interpersonal psychotherapy, and specialist supportive clinical management
Published in
International Journal of Eating Disorders, August 2016
DOI 10.1002/eat.22555
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Therapist adherence to cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT), interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), and specialist supportive clinical management (SSCM) for anorexia nervosa (AN), was examined across three phases of therapy in a randomized clinical trial. Adherence in early, middle, and late phase therapy sessions from 53 of 56 participants in the trial was assessed using the CSPRS-AN by independent raters after listening to complete therapy sessions. The three forms of psychotherapy were distinguishable by blind raters. Subscale scores were higher for the corresponding therapy than the other therapy modalities. In CBT and SSCM, a phase-by-therapy effect was found, with the CBT subscale highest for CBT, intermediate for SSCM, lowest for IPT, and elevated in the middle phase of CBT and SSCM. The SSCM subscale was highest for SSCM, intermediate for CBT, lowest for IPT, and elevated in the middle phase of SSCM. Adherence to activities around normalizing eating, weight gain, and education about anorexia nervosa was higher in SSCM than in either CBT or IPT. Ensuring the distinctiveness of therapies in existing clinical trials with differential treatment outcome is essential. Research on adherence to therapy modalities has the potential to help understanding of the effective components of new and existing treatments for AN. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Int J Eat Disord 2016).

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 81 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 15%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Researcher 5 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 31 38%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 31 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 30 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 27 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,654,928
of 24,577,646 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Eating Disorders
#2,032
of 2,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,769
of 345,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Eating Disorders
#30
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,577,646 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,719 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 345,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.