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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Improving depression management with support from close others: A thematic analysis of individuals with depression and their partners in care.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Chronic Illness, October 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1177/17423953231175690 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah J Javier, Rashmi Risbud, Fernanda S Rossi, Cindie Slightam, James Aikens, Tim Guetterman, John D Piette, Ranak Trivedi |
| Abstract |
With support from others, individuals with depression can build skills and implement lifestyle changes that help them manage their illness. The objective of the current study was to understand how the CarePartners for Depression Program, a randomized clinical trial aimed at enhancing the role of caregivers in the management of depression, improved communication and shared understandings of depression among individuals with depression and their close others. We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with individuals with depression and their caregivers who participated in the CarePartners program. Interviews were qualitatively coded using a thematic analytic framework. We conducted individual interviews with 39 participants in the CarePartners program, including 18 individuals with depression, 14 out-of-home care partners, and 7 informal caregivers. Three central themes were derived from analyses: (a) The quality of interpersonal relationships influenced the management of depression; (2) having clearly defined roles for CarePartners improved communication between CarePartners and individuals with depression; and (3) shared understanding of depression improved management of depression. Our findings established the conditions under which the management of depression was influenced in a dyadic intervention. Dyadic interventions may make it easier for individuals to support patients with depression by fostering communication and collaboration. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 33% |
| Philippines | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 2 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 08 November 2023.
All research outputs
#3,110,092
of 24,927,532 outputs
Outputs from Chronic Illness
#51
of 358 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,162
of 282,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chronic Illness
#3
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,927,532 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 358 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 282,531 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 86% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.